Just Who is conducting the Corrective Process in this evil plane? Just Who is of the Christ Energy and who is of the Anti-Christ energy? Is Earth really God's creation? In order to help you find the correct answer, this poem, #149 from my Poetry Book Volume 3, may assist those who genuinely want to be assisted.

149 Author of the Correction

Alright, Albright, I don't think you are alright!
continued from the last newsletter:

4        "To a student who asked [Albright] whether the United States was not spending too much of its resources on being the world's policeman and too little on more pressing domestic concerns, Albright asked him in return to estimate what share of the federal budget goes to foreign policy. When he guessed 15 or 20 percent, Albright pounced. 'It's 1 percent, 1 percent of the entire budget,' Albright said." Her reply was conspicuously disingenuous. At best, she was referring to the budget of only the State Department, concealing what everyone knows, even the teenage student she browbeat -- US foreign policy expenditures must include the Defense Department, the CIA, the National Security Agency, and a host of other government agencies. Together they consume more than 50 percent of the budget. (There is also a Black Budget which goes into the trillions - editor)

5        In February 1996, as UN ambassador, Albright reacted with righteous indignation against the Cuban pilots who expressed satisfaction after shooting down two planes of Cubans from Florida which were headed toward Cuba. "This one won't mess around any more," one of the pilots is reported to have exclaimed. "I was struck by the joy of these pilots in committing cold-blooded murder," Albright said, accusing the Cuban pilots of "cowardice". What, one may ask, does she think of the American pilots who, while bombing and strafing helpless retreating Iraqis in 1991, exclaimed: "we toasted him" ... "we hit the jackpot" ... "a turkey shoot" ... "shooting fish in a barrel" ... "basically just sitting ducks" ... "There's just nothing like it. It's the biggest Fourth of July show you've ever seen, and to see those tanks just `boom', and more stuff just keeps spewing out of them ... they just become white hot. It's wonderful."{6}

6        On October 8, 1997, in announcing the designation of 18 additional foreign political organizations as terrorist supporting groups, Secretary of State Albright declared that she wanted to help make the United States a "no support for terrorism zone". It could be suggested that if the Secretary were truly committed to this goal, instead of offering her usual lip service, she should begin at home - the anti-Castro community in Miami, collectively, is one of the longest-lasting and most prolific terrorist organizations in the world. Over the years they've carried out hundreds of bombings, shootings, and murders, blown up an airplane, killing 73 people, fired a bazooka at the United Nations, and much, much more. But Madame Albright will not lift a finger against them.

The State Department designates Cuba as one of the states which harbors terrorists. The United States can well be added to that list.

7        At the fabricated "Town Hall" meeting (in which the officials came not to listen, but to tell) held in Columbus, Ohio, February 18, 1998, concerning Iraq, Albright was heckled and asked critical, and perhaps uncomfortable, questions. At one point, her mind and her integrity could come up with no better response than to make something up: "I am really surprised," she declared, "that people feel that it is necessary to defend the rights of Saddam Hussein." At another point. a besieged Albright was moved to yell: "We are the greatest country in the world!" Finally, unable to provide answers that satisfied or quieted the questioners, she stated that she would meet with them after the meeting to answer their questions. But as soon as the meeting ended, the Secretary of State was out of their, posthaste. Her offer, it would seem, had just been a tactic to try and pacify the hostile crowd.

8        And here is Madame Albright at her jingoist best, on TV the day after the Town Hall, again in the context of Iraq: "If we have to use force, it is because we are America! We are the indispensable nation. We stand tall, and we see further into the future."

9        Madeleine Albright, then UN Ambassador, informed the UN Security Council during a 1994 discussion about Iraq: "We recognize this area as vital to US national interests and we will behave, with others, multilaterally when we can and unilaterally when we must." Ms. Albright is thus stating that the United States recognizes no external constraints on its behavior, when it decides that a particular area of the world is "vital to US national interests". It would of course be difficult to locate a spot on the globe that Albright and the United States do not regard as "vital to US national interests.

10         On more than one occasion while U.N. ambassador, Albright yelled at U.N. Secretary-General Boutros-Ghali that he must not publish the report about Israel's bombing of the U.N.-run refugee camp in Qana, Lebanon, in April 1996, which killed more than 100 refugees. The U.N. report said that the attack was not a mistake, as Israel claimed. Albright -- who has surrounded herself with alumni of Israeli and Jewish lobbies -- warned the Secretary-General that if the report came out, the U.S. would veto him for his second term. The report came out, and so did Boutros Boutros-Ghali.

These were from W. Blum, author of Killing Hope, and taken from reports in the Washington Post, "60 Minutes", Los Angeles Times, NBC "Today" show, Middle East International (London), and the New York Times.

As I have often written, this plane is one of lies, deception, distortion and undiluted evil which functions to serve Evil. Nowhere is this more obvious than in the distortion of history. Below are aspects of recent history taken from various sources of the Web which many try to suppress. In many cases, they complement the views I have expressed in these pages. Note that the more one is attacked on this level the more likely it is s/he has revealed aspects of truth. Reading these reports strengthens the belief that this plane and all its activities must end - the sooner the better!

Zionists charge any who question their version of events as revisionists. But, in seeking Truth we must ask "Is Victors' History accurate and valid?" You will see from these extracts that not only are there other points of view, but also that the real revisionists are not always the ones who object to the obfuscating process practised by victors and those in control -the archons and their subservient, sycophantic minions. Remember also at all times the metaphysical principles which have profound effects on the actions of people. The fact that so many in control want to distort history so maliciously enhances the concept that they the rulers and archons are in fact the Anti-Christ Energy - the progeny of the Lie who live and thrive in the Depravity, Darkness and Deception of this Plane of Ignorance and Darkness.

Do not be overwhelmed by the enormous weight of spurious history or by the maliciousness of those who would conceal truth for nefarious gains. None of us on this level can know all the facts and figures that exist. All we need to know is how to discern the essence of Good from that of Evil. The inexorable process of corruption we see should not compound confusion but rather expose the corruptors in all their evilness.

1         U.S. Holocaust Museum Nominee John Roth Compared Rise of Reagan to Rise of Hitler: New Evidence of More Extremist Statements by Prof. Roth, June 11, 1998

NEW YORK- Prof. John Roth, the newly-hired official of the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, not only has compared Israel to the Nazis, but has compared the rise of Ronald Reagan to the rise of Hitler, and has compared poor Americans as well as Palestinian Arabs to the Jews in Nazi Germany. Professor Roth, of Claremont McKenna College in California, was recently named the first director of the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum's new Center for Advanced Holocaust Studies--despite his November 12, 1988 op-ed in the Los Angeles Times comparing Israel to Nazi Germany and the Palestinian Arabs to the Jewish victims of Hitler. Prof. Roth's defenders claimed that the Los Angeles Times article was the only extremist statement he has made or written. But the national Jewish weekly Forward (June 12, 1998) has reported new evidence of a number of additional extremist statements by Roth.

Morton A. Klein, National President of the Zionist Organization of America and a child of Holocaust survivors, said: "It is now clear that Prof. Roth's odious comparison between Israel and the Nazis, in his 1988 Los Angeles Times article, was not an aberration--it is part of a pattern of reckless and offensive statements that Prof. Roth has made about Israel, the Holocaust, and the United States. Someone who has compared Israel to the Nazis, compared Palestinian Arabs to the Jews in Nazi Germany, compared poor Americans to the Jews in Nazi Germany, and compared the rise of Ronald Reagan to the rise of Hitler, is clearly the wrong choice to be director of the Center for Advanced Holocaust Studies of the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum. His writings show that he has a shallow understanding of the uniqueness of the Holocaust and does not really comprehend the actual factors that led to the Holocaust."

The new evidence of Roth's extremism: Compared the election of Ronald Reagan to the Rise of Hitler. In the Fall 1980 issue of the Claremont College publication Current, after the election of Ronald Reagan as president, Prof. Roth wrote an article titled "Ronald Reagan and His American Dream," in which Roth stated that in the wake of the election, "I could not help remembering how forty years ago economic turmoil had conspired with Nazi nationalism and militarism--all intensified by Germany's defeat in World War I--to send the world reeling into catastrophe that virtually annihilated the Jews of Europe and altered the face of the earth forever...It is not entirely mistaken to contemplate our post-election state with fear and trembling. Economic upheavals, following in the wake of a war lost in Vietnam, are spawning American nationalism and militarism --and some other things, too--that may well unleash destruction of their own."

In comparing poor Americans to Jews in Nazi Germany, USA Today reported on October 11, 1988, that Prof. Roth charged that "presidential candidates have little room in their rhetoric to address the problems of the poor," and then added: "In Nazi Germany, he says, educated professionals allowed themselves to ignore what was happening to the Jews."

He also suggested moral equivalence between U.S. and USSR: In the book Ideology and American Experience (published by the Washington Institute for Values in Public Policy in 1986), Prof. Roth suggested a moral equivalence between the United States and the Soviet Union, when he wrote of the US and USSR: "Perhaps neither side can overcome the blindness that hides its own self-deceptive pretensions to know the truth."

He implied America might be "the enemy." In the book The Politics of Latin American Liberation Theology (published by the Washington Institute for Values in Public Policy in 1988), Prof. Roth wrote: "The United States and its people, Christian or not, should begin their response to Latin American liberation theology by asking honestly and self-critically: Is the United States the great enemy?"

He compared Israel to Nazi Germany and Palestinian Arabs to Jewish victims of Hitler. In his Nov.12, 1988 Los Angeles Times article about Israel and the Nazis, Roth asserted: "Kristallnacht [the nationwide anti-Jewish pogrom in Germany in November 1938] --the event itself, the conditions that brought it on and, even more important, the results it produced - should provoke reflection 50 years later. For early November, 1988, has its portents, too. Some of them can be seen in Israel's election returns, which signify a turn to the right, religiously and politically."

"Kristallnacht happened because a political state decided to be rid of people unwanted within its borders. It seems increasingly clear that Israel would prefer to rid itself of Palestinians if it could do so. Not many other nations in the world want the Palestinians, either. As much as any other people today, they are being forced into a tragic part too much like the one played by the European Jews 50 years ago. During this year's remembrance of Kristallnacht, my thoughts are on Palestinian plight at least as much as on Israeli security."

2        The Jewish Mentality Book I by M. A. Hoffman II.

The Campaign for Radical Truth in History

Turning the Tables: A Revaluation: All learning is based upon curiosity and curiosity is the unfettered exploration of that which is interesting. The weird halo of immunity which surrounds the Jewish nation is a highly interesting sanction and no scholar must be faulted for defying it. To pretend that we must approach the Jewish studies with some special reverence and reserve, fearful of causing offense, is a totalitarian expectation. It will undoubtedly be the first reaction of a mind-zapped populace to immediately regard the investigation of the negative factors within the religion of Judaism as a horrible one, "bound to lead to another Holocaust." That the fanatical chauvinism of Jewish partisanship has been absorbed into the body politic of the masses of non Jews to such an overwhelming extent is a high tribute to the power and effectiveness of Jewish propaganda. But this writing is not an attack but a defense.

Within this framework is the presumption of immunity for Judaism. According to the mindset promoted by the System's public schools and private universities and the Established "media" organs of mass communication, Judaism alone among the religions of the world is immune from scholarly criticism. First because it is perfect, being the creed of God's Master or "Chosen" Race and second because, even if it were as flawed to the degree that secular agnosticism asserts that every religion is flawed, it would still be wrong to expose it as such because to do so will lead to another "Holocaust."

If one looks beneath the sham appearances of this late 20th century, that is to say beyond the shuttered provincialism of Jew-worship, one glimpses the outlines of war. A relentless libel is directed at the Christian West, or what remains of it in the ruins, in the aftermath of a half-century of constant propaganda against it. It must be relentless to insure that no smouldering spark shall leap up to illuminate the perpetual dark night of the modern era.

The story of the crucifixion of an honest man at the behest of the Jewish religious and political leadership, whose heroic commitment to the truth above all else, testified to his divine patrimony, has been for 2,000 years a permanent stumbling block to the ascendance of Jewish world supremacy. Therefore every attack upon the historical reality of this story and the person and morality of Jesus has been launched by the Khazars. Where that has proved insufficient, the new state religion of "Holocaust" Newspeak (absent from dictionaries before 1978) has been established by all Western governments and by all hireling priests and preachers. By this means Auschwitz is made to replace Calvary as the axis mundi of Western history. Though the tale of the destruction of the Khazars during World War Two has been wildly and shamelessly exaggerated out of all proportion to what actually occurred in that time, there is no doubt that Jewish people were murdered in the hundreds of thousands and that this was a horrible crime.

But what is never factored into the equation as the indictment of the West is prepared on this basis, is the fact that Hitler and his National Socialist German Worker's Party rose to a fury of indignation against Jewish people directly as a result of what Jewish communists like Trotsky (actual name: Leon Bronstein) and Lenin and the thoroughly-Jewish Bolshevik communist party in Moscow had done to the Christian peasantry of Mother Russia, which the Germans regarded as every inch a "holocaust." (The Jewish extraction of Lenin's mother has long been known to many Russian historians and party bureaucrats with access to inside information. Cf. "Who was a Jew? Why, Lenin of Course!", Jerusalem Post International Edition, Jan. 26, 1991, and Dimitry Volkogonov, Lenin: A New Biography).

Both the Jewish historian Arno Mayer in his book Why Did the Heavens Not Darken? and the German professor of history Ernst Nolte have noted the essential link between what the Jewish communists did to Christians in Russia as the basis for retribution against Jewish people in German-occupied territories.

As Prof. Nolte points out, the Jewish communists in Russia founded their ideology on the demand for extermination on a huge scale. In September of 1918 Jewish communist Grigori Zinoviev advocated the extermination of ten million Russians. In 1919 Lenin called for the deaths of millions of Christian peasants -- the kulaks. " ... for Hitler, Bolshevism was a genuinely terrible vision constantly before the eyes." (Ernst Nolte, "The Holocaust Must Be Seen in Context," The Independent, Nov. 5, 1988).

The horrors of Jewish Bolshevism is a vision almost never seen on our telescreens or newspaper pages. The media of mass communications have been dominated by Khazars and their sympathizers almost since its inception. (Cf. Neal Gabler, How the Jews Invented Hollywood and William Cash, "Kings of the Deal," The Spectator, Oct. 29, 1994).

The myth is that Jews were regarded suspiciously in Germany in the 1930s and eventually punished solely due to sheer Teutonic or Christian cruelty and irrational hatred. Policed entirely out of the agenda is the fact that while Nazism was rising in Germany in the 1930s, Jewish Communist commissars were administering death camps and gulags for millions of Christians trapped inside the borders of the Soviet empire, a fact never revealed in "Holocaust" studies or movies.

While Khazars cry the loudest whenever any group or force obstructs their ambitions--these cries being infinitely magnified by the unprecedented brainwashing abilities of the electronic visual media--it does not necessarily follow that Khazars are in fact the most persecuted or long-suffering of the peoples of the world. The full, graphic account of what the Jewish Communists did to Russia and Eastern Europe has yet to be told.

Another objection to this writing will be that it is, by definition "neo-Nazi" and "crypto-fascist" simply because it does actually dare to do what Jewish historians and writers do weekly to Christianity: criticize it.

Then there is the "extermination" issue. If one attempts a revaluation of the Communist propaganda about Germany which has been absorbed into the body politic of the capitalist West, one is met with the cry of being "an apologist for exterminators." Such lofty moralizing does not even begin to signify anything unless it is consistent. The same critique, then, must be launched against all those "conservatives" and pseudo- "Christians" who defend or admire Winston Churchill. If Churchill is absolved, one can expect some revisionists to also absolve Hitler.

For it is no less a democratic icon than Winston Churchill who advocated the extermination of the civilian population of Germany through air strikes on all German city centers. On July 8, 1940 Churchill wrote that what was needed against the Germans was, "an absolutely devastating, exterminating attack by very heavy bombers on the Nazi homeland..." (Source: Geoffrey Wheatcroft, Spectator, Sept. 29, 1979).

In 1956 Churchill told President Eisenhower, "I am, of course, a Zionist, and have been ever since the Balfour Declaration." (Herbert Mitgang, "The Official Churchill in One Volume," N.Y. Times, Nov. 6, 1991).

This campaign of Allied extermination of the German people had been inaugurated on May 11, 1940 when the Royal Air Force (R.A.F.) was the first to bomb cities, in this case, German cities: "Churchill ordered a series of night raids on Berlin for the specific purpose of diverting German attacks from the airfields of London. After Berlin was attacked six times, the German air force was ordered to attack London, and, as Churchill anticipated, the pressure on the airfields was relieved. Thus began the blitz." (Benjamin Colby, Twas a Famous Victory, p.173,).

But it would not be until Arthur Harris became commander-in-chief of the R.A.F.'s Bomber Command in February of 1942 that Churchill's plan for the extermination of the German people by fire was attempted with total commitment. "Harris was ... single-minded in his aim: the systematic destruction of German cities ... His new campaign was inaugurated on March 28, 1942 with the 234-aircraft attack on Lubeck, a medieval town, strategically insignificant but in Harris's words, 'more like a fire-lighter than a human habitation.' Lubeck was burned to the ground, the first of many ...

"The Ruhr towns were attacked from March to June 1943, Hamburg from July to November, Berlin from November until March, 1944 ... Using much more sophisticated techniques of electronic navigation, of marking and of bombing, the city was first broken up by explosives - 'cookies' designed to blow open doors and windows - and then rained with incendiaries. Repeated raids overwhelmed the civil defense and fire services. Bomber Command attacked Hamburg on 24 July, again on 27 July, with American attacks in between. The raid of the 27th created a vast firestorm, destroying 22 square kilometres of the city and killing an estimated 42,000 people. Fifteen months later Harris would boast that Bomber Command 'has virtually destroyed 45 out of the leading 60 German cities ...'

"One undefended city after another was devastated from end to end by explosion and fire, 'browned' as the repellent R.A.F. phrase had it ... Darmstadt was a beautiful old town in south-west Germany, economically insignificant and untouched until 11 September 1944, when it was 'browned' and 12,300 of its inhabitants were killed ...

"The most famous target in this last phase was Dresden in February, 1945 ... But Dresden was no different in kind from the other terror raids before ... (A month later) Wurzburg ... a town of complete (military) unimportance ... 16 March, 1945 ... Bomber Command razed the town to the ground in slightly less than 20 minutes. Wurzburg, like 600,000 German (civilians), had surrendered unconditionally.

"What was especially reprehensible was the way in which Churchill tried at the end of the war to disassociate himself from the bombing ... After the war Churchill could still write--privately--to an air marshall: 'We should never allow ourselves to apologize for what we did to Germany.' But he had the instincts of a professional politician, and foresaw a reaction. On 28 March 1945 he drafted a memorandum: 'It seems to me the moment has come when the question of bombing of German cities simply for the sake of increasing the terror, though under other pretexts, should be reviewed.

"... it (is) impossible for an Englishman born after the war to travel through Germany without a sense of shame ... seeing medieval Nuremburg which Allied aircraft burnt to the ground and where Allied prosecutors had the effrontery to accuse Goering and Kesselring of bombing Coventry and Rotterdam...' ( Wheatcroft, Spectator, op. cit. Also cf. Max Hastings, Bomber Command.).

Christopher Mayhew, former President of the Oxford Union and a British soldier stationed in Germany wrote: "Have you seen a blitzed town? London isn't blitzed. Norwich is practically undamaged, a prosperous peaceful town. German towns are blitzed." (London Review of Books, June 20, 1985, p.8).

Americans too are culpable. As historian Ronald Schaffer has documented, President Franklin D. Roosevelt approved and encouraged the mass murder of German women and children by the U.S. Army Air Force. A top Roosevelt staff adviser, David T. Griggs, stated the administration's military policy explicitly when he wrote that the effort of the U.S. air forces "should be directed to the disruption of the German economy and the terrorization of the German people." (Ronald Schaffer, Wings of Judgment: American Bombing in World War Two, p. 94).

It was American P-5l Mustang pilots who swooped down along the banks of the river Elbe as masses of terrified German women and children huddled in the daylight aftermath of the firebombing of Dresden. The pilots machine-gunned these pitiful survivors en masse.

In the decay of language that is a signpost of the Orwellian dissolution of independent thinking in our time, the word holocaust, which by original definition denotes death by fire, is now assigned almost exclusively to the deaths of Jews, allegedly by gas. 600,000 German civilians deliberately burned alive as Allied policy, receive no such "holocaust victim" status. In fact, it is regarded as some sort of blasphemy against the canons of "The Holocaust" civic religion that anyone other than a victim of Hitler is described thus.

But anyone who takes the time and trouble to read the official Strategic Bombing Survey, prepared by the U.S. War Department, under the section "Morale Division-Medical Branch Report: The Effect of Bombing on Health and Medical Care in Germany," will find horrific photographs and testimony which testify that the "holocaust" victims of World War Two also included the German civilians and in the Pacific theatre, the civilian residents of Tokyo, Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

The deliberate extermination of the German people through air power resounded among military forces on the ground through the mouthpiece of the chief propagandist for the Soviet empire, the Jewish Communist communications genius, Ilya Ehrenberg. While any college kid can invoke the name of Joseph Goebbels as eponymous with propaganda, Ehrenburg's contribution to this infernal science is virtually unknown.

At Yalta and Potsdam Truman and Churchill approved Stalin's call for the forced deportation of millions of ethnic Germans in those territories ceded to him. This resulted in the mass deportation of all Germans from lands east of the rivers Oder and Neisse. Thousands of German civilians were crammed into railroad cattle cars by the Communists. Those Soviet trains arrived in Berlin with a cargo of dead and dying German children packed like sardines. No "holocaust" movies have been made about the plight of these hapless children. They were of the wrong nationality and religion.

In Czechoslovakia in July, 1945, German women and children were tossed from bridges and more than 2,000 massacred. By the end of 1946, German civilians in the British-occupied zone were receiving as little as 400 calories of food per day - half the ration the inmates at Belsen had received under the Nazis.

When the post-war expulsions and pogroms were over, two million German civilians were dead and fourteen million driven from their ancestral lands in one of the greatest acts of population-transfer in modern history.

We are told that World War Two was "the Good War" against "Germany, a nation conceived in hell itself" (Leslie Gelb, NY Times), "the greatest evil ever produced on earth" (Simon Schama). But in so far as our psyche can disengage itself from Jewish demonizing, the reality is that WWII was a total war, an "unlimited, unconditional war" against not just Hitler and the Nazis but German women, children and defenceless elderly who were held to be collectively guilty.

President Roosevelt stated, "The German people as a whole must have it driven home to them that the whole nation has been engaged in a lawless conspiracy against the decencies of civilization." (Robert Dallek, Franklin D. Roosevelt and American Foreign Policy, pp. 472-473).

To teach them these "decencies," Mr. Roosevelt sanctioned the policies of the extirpation of German women and children through air force bombs and pal "Uncle Joe" Stalin's awfully decent Red Army. Can there be any bloodier a killer on the earth than the do-gooder liberal? Roosevelt's mentality was first echoed in the U.S. in Abraham Lincoln's abolitionist legions who were going to punish the South for its "sins."

Maximillien Robespierre, leader of the French Revolution and the "reign of terror," wrote: "It is necessary to exterminate all those vile and scoundrelly beings who conspire eternally against the rights of man and against the happiness of all people."

A Jewish N.Y. Times editor, Judith Miller, along with most of the kept press, indicted the Ayatollah Khomeni of Iran for demanding of Iraq only "unconditional surrender" during the Iran-Iraq war. (N.Y. Times, May 17, 1992, p. E-3). In the Jewish mentality, only the enemies of Judaism must be fought unconditionally. From this mentality was born Menachem Begin's Beirut, Lebanon, August, 1982 and George Bush's Baghdad, Iraq, 1991. In both wars the indiscriminate bombing of the civilian population was central to military strategy, all in the name of sticky-sweet, fairy godmother platitudes coupled with the dehumanization of the Palestinian and Iraqi people. In both wars the mass murder of civilians by air power caused only a ripple of mild protest.

Dynastic Christian autocrats of antiquity, equated with "persecution" and "religious superstition" by the pundits of our enlightened era," never implemented any such mass murder military policy as we saw the Allies commit in World War Two and the Israeli air force perpetrate on Beirut in the summer of 1982. (Tony Clifton, God Cried).

The groundwork for the military policy of total war emerged in Abraham Lincoln's war against Southern independence; especially in the conduct of Generals Sheridan and Sherman. In the Old World, the British war against the Dutch-South African "Boer" civilians was an augur of the forthcoming "blessings" of the 20th century. The British can be acknowledged as the inventors of the first "concentration" camps where thousands of Boer women and children perished.

But while Lincoln was martyred and subsequently canonized as a secular Federal saint, his military practice was reversed by his successor Johnson almost immediately and with the exception of the most foaming abolitionists, the Southern people were soon viewed by their Northern brethren, as much wronged. A similar revulsion occurred in Britain in the wake of the pacification of the Boers.

Hence it would take the Jewish mentality, ascribing to its opponents absolute evil unmitigated in terms of reprisals for any previous Jewish crimes, to create a lasting marriage between modern policies and resources for total warfare and the permanent dehumanization of the people against whom those policies are directed, be they Germans, Palestinians or Iraqis.

It is not only Khazars or their proxies who slaughter civilian populations. World War I was a more than adequate example of the penchant for slaughter on the part of senile monarchs and corrupt politicians and generals, Axis or Allied. But it took the Jewish mentality to paint such slaughter in the terms of a perpetual morality play wherein any crime is permissible provided it is directed against those who have dared to raise their heads against Judaism and who, by Jewish theological definition, can be the only criminals.

The larger question arises concerning whether Hitler really was an enemy of the Jewish people. One does not refer here to a parochial sense of the war years themselves but rather to their long-term consequences. Hitler as a German nationalist who had assigned himself the task of revival of Western civilization amid the decay, saw in the isolation, separation and if necessary, the destruction of world Jewry, the salvation of Germany and European culture.

But the sum effect of his effort was that Hitler was the real founder of the Israeli state. By losing the war against the Khazars he guaranteed them the public relations bonanza of all time and these masters of guilt-inducement took the ball all the way to nationhood.

Hitler's faith in the benevolence of the Judeo-masonic government of Britain and the Jewish ghetto known as the Vatican revealed that he was another one of those naive schoolboys the right-wing in the West routinely produces. Moreover, his government was riddled with spies and traitors and he gave the most important post of the entire German military, the Luftwaffe, to Göring, who by that time had degenerated into a fat clown out of a comic opera. By 1944 the German people had a popular saying, that, "There was no roof over the Reich." This is not to in anyway disparage the heroism of the individual pilots and commanders of the legendary Luftwaffe's defensive fighter force, which was the best in the world, but rather the criminal incompetence of Göring.

The chief supporters of the revival of Hitlerism in the world today are the Jews. Because they hysterically denounce any honest historical discussion of the virtues as well as the faults of the man and his regime, they are thereby building up immense pressure within the young, who are understandably discontented and therefore, attracted to that which Hitler represents. When a corrupt society wholly condemns a single individual as the "wickedest man in the history of the world," those discontented elements of society who are convinced that the system under which they live is profoundly evil, will naturally gravitate toward this forbidden, near-mythic figure of evil. Their logic will be, "If this stinking society says he was bad, he must have been good." The failure to demythologize Hitler, not just in terms of Hannah Arendt's "banality of evil," but by making an appraisal of the man independent of the function and requirements of Allied and Jewish propaganda, would show him to have been both good and bad; a product of his times set within the context of the mass murder-machine the Jewish Communists had got going in Russia from 1917 onward.

Physical persecution of the Jewish people has always and everywhere failed in European history as a tactic for confining the kind of internal influence Pharisees have in native societies. Pogroms and persecutions are completely counterproductive when dealing with the Jews. It must be remembered that Judaism is an inherently self-destructive, paranoid creed and the various bickering factions within Judaism are at any given time on the verge of civil war. The only factor that can truly unite the Khazars and make them a single force for power on the world stage, is physical persecution and attack.

Without such attack, they inevitably crumble from internal strife. This is why their Sanhedrin secretly promotes and funds violent persecution of Jewish people when such opposition is not present among the resident peasantry of a given nation. If you want to heal the world, leave the Jews alone, physically. They will destroy themselves or convert and reform. The problem is, they won't leave us alone. Whenever we get the thing they fear the most going - when we get going what they have - community - that's when they unleash every force in their arsenal against us.

Under the current system, a critic of Talmudism and Phariseeism must always be labelled as a fascist. The term is used by people who don't know what it means. The most basic concept central to fascism is the utilization of the power of the state through centralization, to achieve certain sanctioned ends: the unity of the nation, the advancement of technology, the solution to the problems of unemployment and housing. Fascism as a system of organization has nothing to do with opposition to Jews. The founders of the Fascist party in Italy were Jews. Right wing Zionists of the 1930s and 40s consciously styled themselves Fascists. The Israeli government is allied with the fascist Phalange Party of Lebanon, whose militia police the "security zone" in occupied South Lebanon on behalf of the Zionists. The most successful fascist government was Franklin Roosevelt's administration whose "New Deal" economic program marshalled the full resources of the state to operate businesses, conduct commerce, confiscate wages and earnings.

The neo-Nazi invective is equally empty and like "fascist" has meaning only as an insult intended to intimidate people who tell the truth fearlessly. It is a manufactured attribute imposed on critics of Judaism by Jews who insist that to expose their religion or its government in occupied Palestine to free and irreverent inquiry is tantamount to being a militarist, a racist and a lover of dictatorship - and this from a militarist, racist, dictatorial Israeli regime.

The greatest weapon against the Zionists is exposure, to have the widest possible study, analysis and dissemination of their authentic teachings and practices in every field of human endeavor. This will not only protect non-Jews but will also help in the conversion of the Jewish people themselves.

Unlike the Allied mass murderers who hold the German people collectively culpable (as historian Daniel Goldhagen has decreed), one cannot and must not hold the Jewish people as whole collectively guilty, but only their leaders, religious and civil, i.e the latter day Pharisees.

The New Testament "blood taint" can no longer apply because the original Jewish race of 2,000 years past is as dead as is the Roman race with which it was contemporary. There is no pure "Jewish" blood today, only a racial melting pot of Khazar, Black and Oriental races designated as "Jewish" on the political expediency.

The greatest allies in the struggle against the evils of Judaism have been in the past and will be in the future, authentic converts from Judaism (for example Nicholas of Donin and Johannes Pffeferkorn). The emphasis here must be on authenticity, however. The current "Jews for Jesus" movement is a telling example of a sham conversion since this group militantly supports the murders and racism of the Zionist Israeli state in contravention of every Christian principle. They have attempted to make Christ into a Pharisee. This is an abomination and these are no true converts. "By their fruits ye shall know them."

Average World Temperature rose 0.6 degrees centigrade from 16.5 to 17.1 C from January to May, 1998. Goodbye Gooney Deniers!!

GLOBAL ROGUE STATE by Edward S. Herman

Dictionary specifications of "rogue" include three elements: viciousness, lack of principle, and propensity to engage in unilateral action. This would certainly properly characterize Saddam Hussein's Iraq: viciousness and lack of principle were displayed, for example, in his attacking and using chemical warfare against both Iran and Iraqi Kurds in the 1980s; unilateralism in his assaults on Iran and Kuwait. But consider that the United States used chemical warfare on a far greater scale against Vietnam in the 1960s, and its overall attack on Indochina was as vicious and far more devastating than Iraq's on its local victims. As to principle, it should be noted that the U.S. aided Saddam Hussein during the 1980s and protected him from any international sanctions, finding his possession of "weapons of mass destruction" intolerable only after he stepped out of line and ceased to be of service. The U.S. is also at least as prone to unilateral actions as Iraq, and commonly ignores an international consensus and international law when they stand in the way of a preferred option (as discussed below).

Retail and Wholesale Rogues: The difference between the two countries in respect of roguery is that the U.S. is a superpower with global reach, whereas Iraq is a relatively weak regional power. The U.S., we might say, engages in wholesale roguery, whereas Iraq is a retail rogue. But nobody in the mainstream calls the wholesale rogue by such a name, any more than they would label it a terrorist state or sponsor of terror, no matter how close the fit. If a country is sufficiently powerful, it naturally assumes the role of global policeman, and as such it designates who are terrorists and rogues. This role is accepted and internalized not only by its own media, but by politicians and the media of its allied and client states. As La Fontaine pointed out in his fable "The Wolf and the Sheep," "The opinion of the Biggest is always the best." Under the rule of the Biggest, the law and rules of morality only apply to others, not to the ruler himself. This double standard rests on sheer power. It is effected through a variety of processes involving the mainstream media, which ignore or play down outrageous behavior and law violations by the ruler, but wax indignant at comparable or lesser enemy actions. Cuba's shooting down of a Cuban refugee plane which flew over its territory was excoriated by the media, but disclosure of multiple U.S. attempts to assassinate Castro caused neither indignation nor reflection on "who is the terrorist." When the global rogue justified terrorizing Nicaragua in the 1980s by the "national security threat" posed by that tiny power, and bombed Baghdad in 1993 following an alleged Iraqi plot to assassinate former president George Bush, on the ground of the right to "self defense," nobody important responded with laughter or indignation. The absurd rationalizations were reported "objectively" and the violent acts were accepted and normalized.

Misusing the UN and World Court : Nothing illustrates the global rogue's lack of principle and propensity to unilateralism better than its treatment of the UN and World Court. When the UN or Court have failed to serve its purposes, the global rogue has assailed them, refused to pay its dues (in violation of the law), withdrawn from UN organizations (UNESCO - United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization; ILO - International Labour Organization), and simply ignored a UN consensus or Court ruling.

The U.S. has used the UN as a cover for its own agenda, but not allowed the UN to function where its positions were inconsistent with that agenda. he most notable recent case of using (and misusing) the UN was the 1990-1991 assault on Iraq, and the sanctions imposed on Iraq which continue to this day. Here the U.S. was deeply upset over an illegal occupation in violation of the UN Charter. And by the aggressive use of its power to coerce and bribe support (well described in Phyllis Bennis's valuable Calling the Shots, chap. 2), the global rogue was able to get the UN to give it a free hand to crush Iraq and keep it crushed thereafter - with a cumulative civilian death toll in the hundreds of thousands. The rogue actually violated the UN charter in implementing the UN resolution giving it a free hand, by resolutely refusing to consider any peaceful settlement and insisting on a military attack. Its use of weapons like uranium enhanced shells and fuel air bombs, the slaughter of large numbers of completely helpless and fleeing soldiers (along with many refugees), burying many of them in unmarked graves, and bulldozing sand over Iraqi trenches killing hundreds more, violated the rules of war, under UN cover.

With Iraq, the global rogue was teaching a lesson to a retail rogue who had crossed it. Clients of the global rogue are treated differently. South Africa, which illegally occupied Namibia, and used it as a jumping off place to invade Angola and support Savimbi (an Angolan politician) and also attacked and terrorized all the other front line states for several decades, was perhaps the number one retail rogue and terrorist state of the last half century. Its occupation of Namibia was condemned by the Security Council, General Assembly and World Court from the late 1960s, and it was ordered to withdraw. But it refused to obey, and no attempt was made to force the termination of that occupation. The U.S. was "constructively engaged" with South Africa, and collaborated with it in its support of Savimbi the Angolan politician, and attacks on Angola and the front line states. Another important case has been that of Israel, which occupied the West Bank and Gaza Strip in 1967, and although Security Council resolution 242 called upon Israel to withdraw it has refused to do so for two decades, without penalty. Israel was also condemned for its collaboration with South Africa and maltreatment of the Palestinians in a long series of UN resolutions. But as the U.S. supports Israel, its occupation and abuses are beyond the reach of UN authority. The U.S. has vetoed some 40 resolutions condemning Israel, and successfully prevents any action constraining it or protecting its victims. The votes are usually in the order of 150-2, but this near unanimity cannot offset the power of the global rogue. In the case of the World Court, the U.S. used it effectively against Iran and other states, but when the Court ruled in favor of Nicaragua in 1986, calling for U.S. reparations for the "unlawful use of force," the U.S. denounced and simply ignored the ruling. In a telling revelation of the subservience of the U.S. media to the global rogue's prerogatives, the New York Times editorialized in support of the U.S. refusal to accept the Court's ruling, calling the Court a "hostile forum." As regards the UN, also, the Times and its media confreres have followed the official agenda, finding the UN ineffectual and wrong-headed when not serving U.S. interests, but finally recovering its proper role, as in the Persian Gulf war, when it functions as a U.S. instrument. With the collapse of the Soviet Union, and virtual U.S. control of the Security Council, the U.S. now regularly bypasses the World Court, and, of course, the UN General Assembly, in carrying out its agenda. Thus it was not only able to use the UN as a cover for war and retribution against Iraq, it has successfully used the Security Council to impose sanctions on Libya for refusing to turn over to the U.S. and Britain two suspects in the bombing of Pan Am 103. Libya denies that the Security Council has jurisdiction and objects to any trial by the biased protagonists, but the World Court has deferred to the Security Council, so this U.S.-dominated body now has a free hand to designate rogues and terrorists. No client of the global rogue has been subjected to sanctions under this regime.

Global Rogue Aggressions: Ignoring both minor bombing raids and the numerous subversive efforts not involving military forces, since the end of World War II, the United States has committed acts of aggression against Guatemala (1954), Lebanon (1958), the Dominican Republic (1965), Vietnam (1954-75), Laos (1964-1975), Cambodia (1969-1975), Nicaragua (1980-1990), Grenada (1983) and Panama (1989). I would argue that the Persian Gulf war was also a case of U.S. aggression, as the U.S. took advantage of Iraq's aggression against Kuwait to smash a regional power that had defied it. In short, the U.S. has been the number one international aggressor over the past 50 years.

In the case of the Vietnam War, the global rogue was able to ignore the 1954 Geneva Accords, place a puppet in power in South Vietnam, invade and bomb all of Indochina, killing as many as four million people over two decades, without the slightest interference from the UN or World Court.

In the case of Panama, the rogue invaded in 1989 to capture its leader, Noriega, allegedly for drug dealing and authoritarian rule. But Noriega had been on the U.S. payroll for years while dealing in drugs and ruling by terror. The real reason for the invasion was Noriega's refusal to collaborate with the U.S. in its illegal attacks on Nicaragua. Again, the U.S. veto and overall power allowed this multi-levelled rogue operation to go forward without impediment.

Terrorism and Sponsorship of Regimes of Terror: As noted, the U.S. has been able to label its targets and victims "terrorists" as well as rogues. Terrorist groups supported and sponsored by the U.S., like Savimbi in Angola, the Nicaraguan contras, and the Cuban refugee network - which has operated out of the U.S. itself - are "freedom fighters," not terrorists, by right of sponsorship. The CIA and U.S. military forces have been outstanding direct instruments of terror: William Blum in Killing Hope lists 35 individuals or groups known to have been targeted by U.S. agents in assassination attempts, some (like Castro and Kaddafi) repeatedly, and with quite a few successfully killed. Larger scale U.S. terrorism has been carried out by its military establishment, with vastly larger civilian casualties, and the establishment terrorism expert J. Bowyer Bell acknowledged that a legitimate question had been raised as to why the "use of American B-52s over Hanoi was an appropriate military exercise, while the Palestinian use of incendiary grenades in Rome was not." Bell never answered the question, but we can do that easily: the Biggest defines what is terrorism as well as who is a rogue.

U.S.-protected clients have also been in the forefront of world terrorism: the massacre of some 600 civilians by the Salvadoran army at the Rio Sumpul river in 1980, the killing of over 600 by South Africa in the Kassinga refugee camp in Angola in 1978, and the Phalange-Israeli massacre of over 1,800 Palestinians at Sabra-Shatila in 1982, each equalled or exceeded the collective total of the Western favorite - the PLO, Baader Meinhof gang and Red Brigades. These are just single episodes by regimes that did a lot of killing. U.S. sponsorship of the National Security State in Latin America, and of regimes like those of Marcos, Mobutu, the Shah of Iran, Suharto, and the Greek colonels, involved the support of serious state terrorism on a global scale. "The real terror network," described in my book of that name (South End, 1982) was a creation of U.S. policy for its own backyard, designed to get rid of obstacles to market expansion and U.S.-amenable rule by terror. It is the genius of the Western propaganda system that, in the face of this reality, the U.S. was and is today portrayed as the steadfast opponent of "terrorism."

Economic Terrorism: The economic rules of the game also apply mainly to others, not to the Biggest. During the 1980s, when the Japanese auto industry was badly out-competing that of the U.S., quotas were imposed by the U.S. in a protectionist system that was applied also in the steel and other industries. This was the same period in which the U.S. was engaged in "aggressive unilateralism," bullying other countries into opening their markets on the ground of sacred free trade principles.

Far more gross has been the U.S. use of food warfare and trade/investment boycotts against political targets like Vietnam, Cuba, Iran, Iraq, Nicaragua and other states that cross it. These boycotts have caused serious hunger, disease and death in the victim countries, although it is often hard to separate the effects of food warfare from those of U.S. direct and proxy military operations. In Nicaragua in the 1980s, the two together helped reduce household real incomes by some 50 percent, contributing to widespread malnutrition, a weakened health care system, and eventually the desired ouster of the Sandinista government. The U.S. policy of "destructive engagement" with Cuba has also substantially affected the Cuban standard of living and health conditions. The American Association of World Health recently reported that food warfare against Cuba "has contributed to serious nutritional deficits, particularly among pregnant women, leading to an increase in low birth-weight babies. In addition, food shortages were linked to a devastating outbreak of neuropathy numbering in the tens of thousands." Caloric intake fell by one third between 1989 and 1993, and curtailed access to water treatment chemicals and medicines has also taken a heavy toll.

The U.S. boycotts of Cuba and Iran and threats to retaliate against foreign companies doing business with them - a form of secondary boycott - violates the global trade rules that the U.S. helped put together, but it exempts itself, usually on the ground of "national security," and its power allows it to get away with self exemption. And the mainstream media, so indignant at the Arab secondary boycott of companies doing business with Israel after the 1967 war, make no comparisons and berate the U.S. allies for disloyalty to the Biggest. Other countries are also expected to make national economic adjustments to reestablish equilibrium that the Biggest doesn't choose to make. A large U.S. trade deficit, for example, could be reduced by policy changes by either the U.S. or by Japan and other major allies. Japanese and European expansionary policies would increase their incomes and prices, and thus enlarge their imports from the U.S. and reduce their exports. On the other hand, the U.S. deficit could be reduced by U.S. contractionary policies that would curtail U.S. imports and increase U.S. exports. The U.S. may expect others to carry out painful contractionary policies, but it naturally does not entertain the possibility that it should be subject to similar pain. From 1945 until today the U.S. has expected the foreign countries to do the adjusting.

Possibly the most important form of economic terrorism carried out by the global rogue has been its contribution to the ongoing aggressive imposition of the neoliberal model of economic life on peoples everywhere. The U.S. has not been alone in pushing this program, which has the support of the community of transnational corporations across the globe, as well as many states whose governments are in thrall to this powerful community. But the Biggest, home of a sizable fraction of transnationals and effectively dominating the IMF and World Bank, has been the leader. The imposition of this model has stripped countries of autonomy and weakened the ability of national majorities to organize and seek change through traditional political processes. It has been associated with a massive upward redistribution of income and wealth and immense misery to the hundreds of millions of losers in the new class war.

Such abuse of power and exploitation by imperial top dogs is not new, as the earlier reigns of Britain and Spain make clear. What is new, however, is the hypocrisy in the exalted self-image of the U.S. as the redeemer nation, bringing "democracy" to the world, as it fights against "protectionism" and the demon retail terrorists and rogue states, constructed to provide its sense of exoneration and purity.

My Comments: All these facts, these injustices are burned into the psyche of national and racial groups and burn within for vengeance. They will wreak havoc upon individuals and groups when fragmenting minds seek to lash out as the deteriorating circumstances such as those of the Endtime demand such a thing in those minds. The quick fix solution of venting the rage on scapegoats and on "them" whom they perceive as having done them wrong will bring on anarchy as never before. The racial strife everywhere and the skin-head football hooliganism of late are but a hint of what is to come!

From the "Trust Us, we know what
is best for you" department:

This is another example of a globalist organization using "science" to deny scientific realities today by projecting that "everything will be just fine" by the middle of next century (exactly as we have seen the World Health Organization do with disease). Notice how they put the problem in terms of "not being able to detect" improvements due to scientific limitations, as if it were all just some kind of measurement difficulties. This is false hope for the fools!

June 22, 1998: UN: Ozone layer at all-time thinnest by 2001. GENEVA (Reuters) - The earth's protective ozone layer will hit its all-time thinnest by 2000 or 2001, the World Meteorological Organization said Monday. Despite forecasts that international measures to halt the decline will help the layer improve by the middle of the next century, the ozone layer is at its most vulnerable now and things will get worse before they get any better, the WMO said. "We could expect this ozone depletion to be stronger than anything we have observed up to now," Rumen Bojkov, the leading ozone expert at the Geneva-based U.N. weather agency, told a news conference. The ozone layer is a protective fragile shield of gas that absorbs harmful ultraviolet rays of the sun but has been increasingly pierced by holes caused by man-made chemicals. The holes are blamed for causing skin cancer and cataracts. Bojkov said the holes were forecast to stay for the coming 20 years before a recovery by the middle of the next century brings it back to the 1960s levels, according to scientific models. But he said detecting any such recovery would take at least another 20 years because of scientific limitations. The WMO also said its research showed that the role of the chemical methyl bromide as an ozone-depleting substance was less than previously thought. The fumigant used in agriculture was seen as the most important ozone-depleting chemical used worldwide.

It called on countries of the world to implement measures agreed by the 1987 Montreal Protocol -- an international agreement on limiting substances that deplete the ozone layer. Under that agreement, developed and developing countries agreed to phase out CFCs -- chlorofluorocarbons which are commonly used in aerosols and refrigeration systems. Many experts doubt the targets can be met, although CFC use has dropped dramatically in many industrialized countries.

It is as if the staff on the "Titanic" are arguing about whether they should make an appointment to debate the need to shuffle the deck chairs as the ship sinks!!

Many have asked me these questions: "Who are you to have such information? Where does the information come from?" My advice to you is this: the answer to these questions is not as important as the answer to these questions you should ask yourself: "Who am I? What relevance is this information to me?"

Regarding the first two questions, I could give any number of facts relating to who I think I am and what the Source of this information is. But on this level, at this time, I would be in no position whatsoever to prove anything I say. At the same time no one is in any position to disprove what I say. So really the answers I could give are irrelevant.

But the questions you need to ask yourself and the answers you can supply are not only relevant, they are of paramount importance, for on them depends your eternal fate. This fate can in no way depend on the answers to the question of who I am and where I get my information.

Your answer to your own interrogation is going to be that you are Good or Evil. My identity has no bearing on that. This information is relevant to you or it is not. Again that has no bearing on where I got it.

So you see, your fate is in your hands and no one else's.

This information is relevant to you if it mirrors the knowledge within you. If it does, the source of where I got the facts to awaken you to your inner truth is irrelevant. If it does not mirror your inner truth then it does not matter who I am or where my information came from, does it? In this case you would pursue the path according to your own volition.

If it does resonate with your internal truths, then you will follow that knowledge within you to prepare for the future, for you will believe in yourself. Then you can identify the source of the knowledge, your truth, as the God Consciousness within you. And that, after all, is the only truth you should acknowledge and follow, for did not Jesus Christ Himself say the Kingdom of Heaven is within?

Once a being is awakened by the Light, s/he has no need for external agents. It has no need to ask my identity. The being knows that on some level it knows all and is not threatened by my identity, knowledge or message.

But evil beings are threatened, even though they ask repeatedly who I might be. But being evil, no matter what answer is given, they are not going to believe it. So why give them any answer? I don't.

A seeker who is on the spiritual path would be foolish indeed to consider himself/herself less subjected to programming, pollution and indoctrination without taking proper protective steps. In fact, when one aligns with the Light, greater efforts are made by the opposition to block progress. You would be wise to remember also that many are extremely programmed, polluted and indoctrinated while they put on the airs and graces of being "in the Light". Such deceivers are more likely to be of the opposition waiting to trap, exploit, injure and block unwary genuine seekers.

For us stuck in this physical dimension, the dimension appears to be all-important. But really, how important is this physical dimension? The answer is that it is not very important at all. Most of the True Beings (consciousnesses) have been removed from the human class. The animal and vegetable class are also well advanced in the evacuation plans. So really, the physical dimension is going to be left to self-destruct. Its importance and significance to consciousnesses outside of it are nought.

In youthful exuberance, sometimes in mature reflection, with or without the counsel of others, one chooses a partner. Who can tell in early days whether in time that partner will reveal itself to be a warlock/witch/demon? The very system that blinds us to the true nature of others has been purposely designed that way so that we can be trapped and exploited while we succumb to the apparently pleasant, but eventually possibly spiritually fatal seduction of the senses.

It is a fact that beings of Light are targets of the evil demi-god, the Evil Mind, - known by many names. For the beings of Light it is a situation of total spiritual war in this world, in this dimension. Therefore, it is important to be clear about the Evil Mind's targets in this War. The demi-god's target is the True God of Light and particularly the True Beings. The Demi-god of this dimension does not need to bother too much about those who are already safely in his control. But those who have defied him and who have committed themselves to oppose him are his major targets. That is why it often seems that temptation, attacks and problems in life increase when we are awakened to the Light. This is no illusion! This is not a psychological effect or paranoia. We do pass from apparent security into the firing line.

The ultimate aim of the evil demi-god is the liquidation of the beings of Light. In a world where Good and Evil are genuine options and where people seem to have a measure of freewill to choose, temptation is inevitable. The true God of Light does not tempt us. When pressure is allowed to come upon us, the Divine within us prompts us to overcome temptation and pressure, and be all the stronger for it. But when the evil demi-god of this world brings pressures on us, he wants to break us; he wants us to give up our resistance against him; he wants to milk every drop of energy from us for evil purposes; he wants to overwhelm us and for us to be all the weaker afterwards. To achieve his selfish, evil aims he uses all sorts of tactics - lies, threats, torture, temptations, impositions, suffering, confusion, etc..

Temptation comes to everyone, no matter how strong, how good, how weak, or how wicked one may be. Remember the story of Jesus' temptation by the Prince of Darkness recounted in the Bible? Clearly, we can all identify the reality of temptation in our lives. The important thing is not to give in to temptation when it confronts us. It is not the fact of temptation, but the giving in to it which is serious. Evil is powerless against us as long as we do not give our will over to it. The evil demi-god is powerless until we say "yes" to him. Hence, as long as we do not give our will over to Evil, Evil cannot truly win even if it means we have to suffer humiliation, injustice and pain.

If we give in to Evil, it becomes harder to combat the next time. However, this does not necessarily mean that it would become easier the next time if we resisted. It may be a case that we become exposed to a stronger degree of evil than before. But as we become stronger in the process, so too are we able to resist stronger attacks from evil.

The evil demi-god does everything he can to prevent beings responding to the Divine message of the Light brought forth by the Light's messengers. Evil does not want people to awaken to the Truth. Thus, when one awakens, one becomes a target of Evil. Evil and its archons and minions are always out to crush the beginnings of true spiritual life. Evil discredits the Divine message by mixing truth with untruth, by lies and falsehood, by inflicting fear of punishment, etc.

The evil demi-god achieves his end by all sorts of disguises. For example, those around you who appear to be nice, helpful, kind and open would say to you that all religions and beliefs lead to God and therefore, it does not matter what you believe. For a start, belief in the existence of two creations of Good and Evil is neither a religion nor just a belief. It is a fact, a reality. The statement that all leads to the same God is saying that we should not take things seriously, for ultimately there is no need for discernment, for all leads to the same goal. This is false. This is evil because it distracts the unaware from the Truth, from their liberation.

Another common utterance of untruth is this: There is no evil. What appears evil is only a privation of good, only states of awareness and evolution which resulted in the perception of evil by people. Indeed, this is a disguise of Evil. Evil wants to keep beings divided. Evil does not want beings of Light to speak up against falsehood. Evil does not want beings to know the Truth. One extremely effective common tactic in stopping people from responding to the Light is via the programming of sex and seduction. This is done by encouraging and seducing true beings to fall in "love" with and marry a partner who has no intent in being in the Light. What partnership is there between the beings of Light and beings of Darkness? None at all. But Evil knows that if it can control one member of a marriage, it can influence the pair and various aspects of their existence. If seduction fails, coercion is another of Evil's favorite tactics. In order to keep true beings from the Truth, persecution in various forms, and social pressures, fears, loneliness, economic, health and family pressures can all be employed to coax people into the seduction to Darkness.

When we reject evil and serve the Light, Evil will attack us relentlessly but as long as we do not "sell" our Divine blue-print to Evil, Evil cannot win. Evil utters untruths about you and comes forth with its false witnesses and the so-called evidence. This is done in the hope of blocking you from the Divine path and progress. Evil wants you to give up trying. Evil wants to break you and throw you off balance through lust, through threats of loss of job, or loss of your loved ones.

Evil tempts you with doubts. These can come in many forms and disguises. Fear is a very effective tactic laid upon the true beings and fear can come in many forms. Fear is an extremely powerful weapon employed by Evil to trap and control people. Jealousy, laziness, false asceticism, depression and discouragement are effective tools against true beings.

At the present time the attacks on minds are intense and will continue to intensify. Evil is out to confuse. It sows all doubts and fears to paralyse and confuse us. Evil torments the mind of individuals. The Evil force invites one to doubt the Divine's goodness and truth. It casts doubt about what is right and whether or not to act in obedience to our own intuition.

Live not from emotions but from your being, from your inner awareness. Determine how you want to use your energy, abilities, resources, and available time. You need not be concerned about what others think.

Maintain friendly, supportive relationships with those with whom you choose to share your energy, your life, while maintaining your spiritual integrity. If that is not possible, you have to choose whether to compromise (i.e. to give in) or to stand by your true-self. Each is responsible for his or her own decision. There are many decisions one has to make in life. If you think you can always make a decision without someone else being unhappy with you, you are wrong. You have to choose what is right for your highest good.

If you compromise with Evil, you are lost to Evil. It is the responsibility of each true being to make the important decision to follow the Light and to make a total commitment to the Light. The decision has to be yours and no one else's. But remember, we are never alone.

Amitakh.

Poem # 162 from my Poetry Book Volume 3

HYPOCRITES

****

J S Chiappalone. Copyright 1998 .

Please address all correspondence to

Annwn Publications at PO Box 28, Malanda, 4885, Qld, Australia.

Books
Tapes
Order Form
The Annwn Main Page