More from my ebook, please donate to the website and help an old info-soldier out.
The world we live in only exists as long as one or all of our sense organs are there to interpret it. In a sense our imaginations are also a sense organ, though as we know sometimes the imagination is not a perfectly accurate measurer of reality and sometimes the view of reality can become distorted due to inherent influences of the mind and so conditions like chronic paranoia and other mental disorders may develop.
As we have seen with the various sad tales of murderers and serial killers doing ‘God’s work’ as they term it, these people have become psychologically damaged at some point and thus their minds and imaginations are an imperfect reader of reality, the case in point is the sad tale of Freemason bit-part actor Michael Brea who saw three chickens being cooked in a pot by his mother and his damaged imagination saw them as some kind of sacrifice and proof that his mother was some kind of witch.
A more commonplace example might be the person who was subjected to a serious assault by a man in a previous relationship; this person as a result may harbour an irrational fear of intimacy with men: the previous experiences of the past tend to colour what you see in the present and even what you project for yourself in the future. For example such a person may see men as untrustworthy and all potentially violent, it is therefore unlikely that they will be able to forge strong bonds of intimacy and thus their views will remain unchallenged as they will have a mindset which perpetuates itself. This is one of the curses of Feminism and its agents are all operating under just such a form of self-fulfilling mind-control.
However when people become convinced of something, even though it may seem incorrect to other people, it becomes reality itself for them. This is why mental disorders are so hard to treat because the vision of the psychotic mind is the very reality they are experiencing. There is an extra metaphysical element in all this which currently eludes our modern scientific understanding. The fact that the inner reality experienced by someone becomes so powerful that it also becomes the external reality.
An example we can rationalise quite easily would be the example of the depressive. The depressive really wants friends and company and wants to be happy, however there is some stream of thought operating in this person’s mind which presently prevents this. The thought becomes a habit and brain chemistry changes to render the condition chronic. It is now not only a thought or idea which triggers a bout of depression but indeed the whole world, everything depresses this person because of their change in brain chemistry which now interprets all stimuli as negative or potentially so.
Furthermore the fact that this person always looks so gloomy and unhappy and seems to lack the pleasant volubility which people generally enjoy, will lead to people consciously avoiding him or even being outwardly unpleasant to him. All of which of course will further prejudice his outlook on the world. Conversely the happy, confident person who always smiles and makes people feel good to be with, will enjoy more positivity in their lives from their relationships as people will generally be attracted to them.
The extra element to all this is rather harder to put into words however. There is a certain luckiness which self confidence brings, the certainty that things are going to work out well for that person, generally but not always, leads to the desired result. Double sixes, a winning hand, the perfect goal. Sportsmen know of this phenomenon and I spent some time with professional archers in France and at that time the world’s number one archer was a Frenchman.
At the time I thought that archery was just a matter of lining up the target and firing the arrow but they told me that there was much more to it that that; a kind of inner mastery was needed to hit the centre of target which I was told, was a physical impossibility using only the physical senses: the centre of the target can only scarcely be seen and there is no physical way to make the arrow hit the middle of the target. Instead it was all done with the mind. A sense of certainty and confidence being necessary; an inner stillness required to tell the body how best to fire the arrow to strike the centre.
Again and again I was informed of this quasi-mystical side to the sport of archery and by extension, to all sports, indeed this was more or less proven to me by the fact that unfortunately for France archery, the world number one had recently had a dramatic drop in form and was underperforming in every competition he entered. It seemed his time was coming to an end. Yet he was still a young man so what could have been the reason? I asked around and was told, to prove their hypothesis of the inner stillness, that he was having relationship problems and that this had caused his drop in form.
Everyone has experienced this but has not known to put it into words. On the other hand the person who feels hopeless and the world is set against them will generally always throw double noughts in whatever they intend to do. This confidence and certainty in the self is one of the surest ways to succeed in any undertaking and is the key to what people call ‘magic’. It still exists, and some people take it very seriously: the Freemasons for one. There are forms of magic which have become more or less domesticated and entered the mainstream, such as hypnotism.
Hypnotism is achievable only when the person acquiesces to have their will dominated by another. Hypnotism is the act of having someone else control your reality for you by the exertion and projection of their will on to you. I have read a book about hypnotism, written by a long time practitioner, who says the most important thing needed in order to hypnotise someone is to believe you can do it in the first place. Hypnotism is a kind of distillation or essence of what we know as charisma or charm; when we see someone who is supremely confident and assured, without being cocky, we generally trust them, whereas people who are disordered and appear to mumble and lack confidence we might pity but certainly never would we place our confidence in them.
Perhaps this hearkens back to our early tribal human history when we banded together and always sought the strongest most able member of the tribe to lead and defend our tribe against the incursions and attacks of the other groups. The member with the surest aim when hunting and defending the tribe; the one whose step was always the surest and always knew how to deal with any emergency which struck the tribe, was sure to be highly esteemed and deferred to in matters of authority. Just as surely as dogs fight amongst themselves to find the pack leader, it is a natural need to find the leader. Arguably we have the same thing today in politics, however it seems only necessary these days for politicians to have the appearance of authority and skill without actually possessing them.
So hypnotism is the impact one person can have on totally dictating the reality of another person. It is a strange phenomenon and one that above all else should alert us to the fact that reality as we term it is not always quite what it seems. For example during some stage shows, members of the public can be hypnotised to edit out people from their reality field altogether, often with comic results. A wife or parent can be stood right in front of the hypnotised person and yet they will not see them, yet their eyes are open and they are looking directly at them.
What has happened in that the overall flux of reality has been edited out by the subconscious at the instigation of the hypnotic instruction. This isn’t as rare as it seems: we are constantly editing and modifying the overall flux of reality to suit what ideas are already in our minds.
Look below and read the sign, what does it say?
Are you sure?
Here’s another one coming up, keep ‘em peeled.
How many legs does the elephant have?
So our minds are constantly modifying reality to suit what our minds think should be there. We can never really know to what extent this filtering totally dominates our perceptions because by nature we cannot see what doesn’t exist outside of our perception. Often very young children are known to talk to people who are not apparently there, and I’m sure everyone has at least heard about such instances in their own families.
So there exists a flux of reality and our minds select what they want us to see. This applies to colours and even the perception of time itself. Some animals have a totally different perception of time to our: insects see colours which we cannot see and flies always seem able to dodge our best efforts to swat them because in their perception we lumber around slowly and are easily outwitted. Elephants on the other hand seem to lumber around slowly to our eyes but in their perception of us we seem to wiz around like flies. It’s strange to say but if a fly had a wristwatch, the second hand would move very slowly for them, while the elephant’s mantle clock would have a second hand which to their perception would be whizzing around the clock-face.
This same phenomenon takes place in the human mind; time is not absolute, our perception of it changes according to the circumstances we find ourselves in. Time flies when you’re having fun is often seen as little more than a platitude but reveals a certain hidden truth about the world we live in. Time drags on slowly when we are bored, just as when we were younger time seemed to pass much more slowly, yet with age our perception of time changes and although a day surely still contains twenty four hours, it is how we experience those hours which has changed.
This is to do with our physical metabolism which slows down noticeably as we age. The best way to visualise this is to imagine a camera set on a fast shutter setting; this is akin to the faster metabolic rate that children have. If conversely you set the camera to a slower shutter speed and within the same time frame took a series of pictures you would find that although the camera operated within the same time period the higher shutter speed would have taken more photos than the slower shutter speed. These pictures are analogous to our experience of reality: the more ‘pictures’ or snapshots of reality we take with our perception the more we appear to have experienced in that time frame, thus the sense that the time-frame appeared busier and more full: in short that time seems to pass more slowly.
Therefore we cannot talk of an absolute reality: we all see things differently yet we agree on several fundamental ideas, however there are things we do not yet agree on such as religion and spirituality, and for our governments since time began these have been causes for war because a government is in the business of ensuring that everyone agrees with what it tells them to believe.
The Empire’s sole wish is to have absolute homogeneity throughout the world; this is what we know as ‘globalisation’. The reason for this is control: the government, and ‘New World Order’s’ wish is to control all aspects of our lives, from what we eat (Monsanto GM food patents, Codex Alimentarius being pertinent examples) to what we believe. The reason for this is for the satanic powers hidden behind the scenes to show their superiority to God by presenting a case that it ‘owns’ the human race. Since human beings have something of God within them too, the Satanists will also imagine that they are ‘owning’ God and dominating this force.
The prime weapon in this battle for our souls is ‘fear’. Ours fears weaken us: they use this as a tool. FEAR Everywhere, at least the cause and manifestations of it. If we can reach the point that there is nothing left to be afraid of, then we will be free from so many of the petty miseries which affect us from day to day. This was the intended effect of many of the mystery school religions which have since become subsumed by Freemasonry and special ops techniques of mind control, but so far it seems to have mostly produced killers for hire. And obviously the art of being fearlessly able to kill someone while useful to psychopaths perhaps, wouldn’t, in an ideal world, be something most of us would consciously wish to be involved in.
And indeed it takes a lot of effort to partially brutalise someone and make them excited by the prospect of firing firearms at other people. And so their dear friends at Hollywood help them out by producing streams of movies each more violent than the last, in order to completely cut our soul connection to higher emotional states. Most film goers are subjected to violence, pain, loss, tension, murder, confusion, anger, terror, and the end. A lot of films are specifically about revenge and this is the very anti-thesis to contentment. To watch a film about someone who is the victim of something often needlessly unpleasant, and then to be doubly subjected to him furthering the list of unpleasant things and somehow making you feel good about it all.
The ‘feel good’ part of a film is to revel in and offer praise to violence and experience Aristotle’s catharsis. We’ve all been there. When the good guy kills the really nasty bad guy because he really deserved it, don’t we feel good about that? Don’t we just love to see that particular cliché endlessly repeated by Hollywood and co? I wonder just how crafty our government is and do surmise that possibly they try to have various wars in foreign countries on the basis that the whole country somehow needing to express this ‘revenge’ factor on some poor sand blown country or other.
Whether it was the feel good revenge moment of the UN killing all those nasty Serbs who had been so nasty to those Muslims. All of these films show extremely unlikely things happening to various highly paid actors, who pretend to be extremely cross or angry, then kill with relish as they achieve their goal. The worst sorts of films are simply the horror films, where they merely present for your entertainment pleasure, the spectacle of most of the characters from the film being killed in a variety of ways. Something quite like the absurd initiation rituals of the ancients. Basically the idea of watching a film is, obvious as it may sound, the act of being an observer to a spectacle.
It is by no means a natural state. Strange as it may seem the phenomenon of watching films of people who are ‘pretending to do something’ to each other is in no ways necessary to the positive development of our species. It is essentially a mendacious activity. Not to mention genuinely cruel. Why would anyone want to do what an actor does and lie to people and try to lie so well that they actually make the viewer feel the emotions that they’re only pretending to feel? What a strange thing to do. And very seldom are any of the positive possibilities of film exploited; namely the possibility that people might get paid huge amounts of money to pretend to be happy and be getting on fine with just everyone, in the hope that the people watching will actually feel those emotions and become happy themselves and start getting on with just everyone.
How many genuine feel good films are there out there? Actually very few. One finds that even films that are touted as feel-good films are simply nothing of the sort. They may have a happy ending but that is no guarantee. Often a so called ‘feel-good’ film just has a few pleasant moments of warmth and joy, but in nearly all cases, the rest of the film, in order to put the happy and ‘uplifting’ bits in better relief, contains proportionately more moments of tension, loss, sadness and anyone of a hundred negative and enfeebling emotions. For it to be a feel good film it seems a precondition that there should be something to feel bad about in the first place.
Often many fantasy based films are ostensibly feel-good films, but they often have a slightly dark side, particularly something like Disney which frequently confronts children with shocking and unpleasant circumstances, such as Simba’s guilt for him believing he caused the death of his father. Simply put, these nasty little ideas aimed at children are mini psychological tortures. Indeed, from a psychological point of view I suspect one of at least two things happen to the child as a result of being presented with these cruel situations, one, they react by becoming slightly melancholy, or they react by cutting themselves off emotionally.
I believe this is what has happened to psychopaths. At some point in their lives they have faced a traumatic and terrible event in their lives. It could be something monstrously unpleasant which has happened to them, or which they’ve been a party to; perhaps as a result of the terrible psychological trauma they react with damage control by switching off their emotions. They simply have nothing left to hang on to so they hang onto nothing.
This would explain a lot of the riddles of the psychopath and how it has been surmised that these people don’t have souls or are somehow a race apart. They’re also a mystery because they do not announce themselves. They keep their condition a secret, at least if they are successful psychopaths they do; often they can go for years undetected and their damage to society is only later discovered. I’ve little doubt that psychopaths can sense their ‘fellows’, because if they know how to emulate the conventions of society most of the time, then surely they also know what the difference is between real and phoney, so presumably they would be aware when a fellow psychopath is just faking it like they do.
To return to films, what is really much worse is that we have no reason to feel these emotions. Not only is it not happening to us but it is not happening at all! In many instances I genuinely believe that many viewers actually dissolve themselves into the unreality of the character, somehow making it real and imparting genuine life to it!
Those people watching the show are breathing life into it whenever their minds, emotions and thought patterns, start to be centred around the fake spectacle they are watching. This is a kind of a magic. Kind of like hypnotism. I wonder if during an episode of Eastenders, some Mitchell or other started directing hypnotic commands at people, would they even notice? If, during a lull at the Queen Vic, Barbara Windsor started looking at the camera and gently crooning, ‘you’re feeling sleepy’, how many would make the leap from partial hypnosis by the TV to full hypnosis? Probably plenty.
Why are the people watching the big-screen paying for the strange privilege of going to watch something that will either make them feel unnecessarily sad, angry, tense, or, if the viewer has been watching people being killed, then brutalised and ultimately degraded?
This lowers our inner strength. I have felt it myself. Particularly during scenes where there is a very quick and unexpected execution. They are particularly shocking, and several times I have watched such scenes and at that very moment of being shocked with a sudden brutal killing, I have felt the distinct feeling of having a cold coming on. We need to have a default feeling of warm and peaceful, just like cats napping in the sun, there is no reason why we shouldn’t be encouraged to enjoy more positive thoughts and be exposed to more pleasant and in fact, real stimuli. It’s a case of so called actors inflicting their characters and their thousand and one calamities on us.
This is one of the very things we all take for granted. We assume films, like politicians, are important to our lives and that we should take notice of them. Why? They only feed us lies and fears. They only enfeeble our minds and play on our thoughts and preoccupy our ideas. Often people think a lot about a film they have seen and it plays upon and traumatises their minds in a hundred different ways.
The sum total of all of these acts of psychological manipulation on the human mind at all stages of its development is to cut off our perception of any higher ideas, or at least to reduce their impact, to trammel our minds into a what is commonly known as a ‘low vibratory’ domain of blood crime and general anxiety.
So our field of reality is being deliberately reduced so we focus only on the negative aspects of life. This is the media and the government’s job. They feed us a reality we can all agree on, sadly it happens to be a lowest common denominator reality of the very lowest wishes and pulsions: greed, avarice, wealth, fame are all shown as laudable by our media. Our government tell us that obedience and conformity is the key to fitting-into their system; anyone who seeks to transcend this and think for themselves will soon find themselves relatively isolated as those around him will tend to subscribe to the general definition of reality.
Fortunately things are changing: more and more people are becoming aware of the fabrications of governments and how they use fear as a tool for social control, indeed there was a particularly successful three part TV series on BBC 1 within the past few years or so called ‘The Power of Nightmares’ which basically exposed the lie of the war on terror and how it was little more than a way for governments to reassert the social control and deference that has gradually been slipping from them in the years since World War Two.
The world is not composed of terrorists and muggers, nor of WAGS and pop-stars, but primarily of light. WAGS and pop-stars are only a product of the first cause. The world of so called reality is a collection or signals of light which are vibrating, it is only when we perceive these light signals that our brains create the appearance of a pop-star or a television set or whatever sight our gaze has lighted on. Television is a useful metaphor for the way we perceive reality. Just as a TV set receives electromagnetic signals from the air. Take the example of the TV: there are TV signals constantly flowing through the air, however it is only when we turn on the TV (which perceives the signals) that we actually get a picture. Without the ability to perceive the signal there are only invisible electromagnetic waves, or disordered flux.
This is also the reality which we find ourselves in; all around us is the disordered flux of the full range of the electromagnetic spectrum of which we can only perceive the smallest portion; the visible light spectrum is only four hundred nanometres long yet the full length of the electromagnetic spectrum is the size of the universe itself.
We are bathed in fog of light within which we see the familiar forms and shapes of our daily world, but the rest of us remains wholly invisible and its existence totally unsuspected. There are unknown colours shapes and even potential realities hidden in the electromagnetic flux but if we cannot see them they effectively do not exist to us. A useful analogy is the tree which falls in the forest with no one to hear it. Does it make a sound as it falls? With no one to hear it or perceive it with their senses not only does it not make a sound but cannot be ascertained whether it has even fallen in the first place.
This is the central tenet of quantum physics. That only physical observation of a phenomenon can bring the phenomenon into a state of reality. The classic scientific example is the quantum box containing Schrodinger’s cat, within the box is a device which may kill the cat if the cat accidentally touches it. However it is only upon opening the box that the state of the cat, alive or dead, can be ascertained, prior to actual observation the cat is said to exist in both states simultaneously, it could be either alive or dead, quantum physics merely alters its perception to say that the cat is both alive and dead. The cat is in a state of metaphysical flux. It is only when one’s perception, as Einstein terms it, becomes ‘entangled’ with the object that it takes on a reality in space and time, until then it exists in flux as undefined potentiality.
When you leave a room, providing there is nothing there to perceive the room at any level, the room will enter a state of flux or potentiality. In a manner of speaking it ceases to exist. I have been involved in debates on this concept and some people find the whole idea artificial and hard to accept; one challenge is that it is wrong to talk of flux because if a CCTV camera were to film the inside of a room then when the door was closed and the observer left the room could still be shown to exist in its apparent ‘real’ state.
One response might be that the CCTV camera doesn’t have any consciousness so it doesn’t perceive the room in any way: it merely records the metaphysical flux as a series of signals. It is only when you actually unscramble the digital signal and have the recording put through your TV and watch it that the potentiality of the room becomes reality. Remember the camera doesn’t watch anything: it can’t, it doesn’t perceive, it merely records the level of flux within the ability of its technology, as an electromagnetic signal which can be later decoded and the reality of the room established.
How can something be seen when no-one is there to see it? Light has several interesting qualities, one of which is that it needs an observer to exist in one form or another. Every school kid does the diffraction grating-experiment at some point, this experiment actually proves that light behaves only how it is measured to behave. Measure light in a different way and it will change its behaviour to conform to the observer, either as a particle or as a wave.
This is all in line with quantum theory. Another challenge was that if a torch were switched on in a cupboard for a few days, the batteries will still be dead after a few days, therefore apparently proving that there was an unobserved light phenomenon taking place. My response in this instance was to say that an electrical connection has been made, therefore electricity will run in the circuit but the light itself from the torch will enter a state of electromagnetic flux and will become just a signal of potentiality. The battery will be dead but no one saw the light! So it won't exist, only as an effect; a flat battery will be the only observable reality from opening the cupboard door after two days. Without being seen, even an operating torch will enter the state of quantum flux, with no real reality until the door is opened.
However if there is any kind of observer inside the cupboard, be it even a small insect or a spider, then the light will be perceived, at least in the way a small insect or a spider perceives light. In a similar way if we leave a room and close the door while a dog or mouse remain inside, then the flux will be ordered according to the perceptions of the creature, suffice it to say that will have a different view of reality to ourselves.
For a start the dog will perceive odours which we will not be aware of, and the colours and forms we see will have a totally different meanings for the dog. The dog will be aware of the sofa for example as somewhere he can sit but as to the meaning of the television with its buzzing sounds and lights he will have no idea.
The mouse’s reality field will again be totally different: the forms and shapes it sees will have a different meaning, none of the associations of objects we have as humans will mean anything to a mouse so it will likely see only lines and edges of objects rather than the objects themselves in their complete self existence. A table for instance would not be ‘a table’ to a mouse because a table is an object and a series of concepts: it would only be a collection of edges, sides and materials. Its involvement with the object would not be with the object itself but only with its composite parts, thus it would be seeing a different reality of the same objects that we are seeing.
What if we ourselves have a similarly limited perception of the whole universe? What if instead of seeing the universe in all its complete self existence we are only seeing edges, sides and its composite materials? Everything in nature is a question of scale and one can hardly deny that we humans are only creatures which exist on a different scale, of colour size and time perception to other forms of life. Just as we see animals below us on the scale, it is only natural that there exist beings above us on the scale, which we cannot directly perceive as we are limited to perceiving only the human world we have been told is real. Sometimes we get the same phenomenon when we see an unfamiliar object, or go into an unfamiliar place, particularly if navigating, it takes a while to build up an overall knowledge of the place and be able to understand what is where and build up complete spatial awareness.
Operating a new camera or exploring a new town, our awareness of how to operate the object or find our way around, is in flux until we can record enough information about it that we can be certain of its qualities. We are ‘in the dark’ so to speak. An appropriate metaphor considering it’s all about light.
To extrapolate this idea further, if the universe were suddenly somehow to become completely devoid of life and consciousness it would cease to exist. However there is consciousness all throughout the universe and always has been, even in its earliest stages of formation, a non corporeal awareness that drives on and creates all physical life as we know it; this explains the seeming inherent intelligence of nature and how creatures likes bees and ants are able to create complex societies; it also explains evolution and how animals adapt to their environments over time, despite these changes taking place over many lifetimes of individual animals, it is the motor of life and it is intelligent: it reacts, learns and grows, perhaps too this is what we may call God.