Whereas the majority of the American people are religious (Christians) and patriotic, the bipartisan “regime class” — stripped of their lip-service rhetoric — are irreligious, arrogant and contemptuous of the American people, and love neither America nor her people.
We saw another display of that bipartisan ruling class at RINO Sen. John McCain’s funeral on September 1, when former president George W. Bush, 72, behaving like an impish schoolboy, snuck a piece of candy to a beaming Michelle “Big Mike” Obama, as their respective spouses, Barack and Laura, smiled indulgently.
Who knew that a funeral is an occasion for jovial frivolity?
Wes Walker of Clash Daily points out this isn’t the first time George W. was cozy with Big Mike:
(1) Big Mike hugs George W. during the inauguration of the Smithsonian’s National Museum of African American History and Culture, September 24, 2016:
(2) George W. kisses Big Mike, then the two hold hands and sing to one another at a memorial service for five slain police officers in Dallas, July 16, 2016:
And what was Big Mike doing with his hands in the laps of Barack and George W., as all three and Laura Bush grin as if they’re in on some private joke? What was so amusing at a memorial service for slain police officers?
Wes Walker observes:
Dubya must have finally paid off his Progressive Penance by opposing Trump’s nomination. Because it wasn’t so long ago that he was a racist, war criminal and literally Hitler.
For eight long years, the Obamas didn’t have a single nice thing to say about Bush. And now they’re best buds? He must not be the world’s most hated racist anymore.
Maybe it had something to do with Bush having joined the #Resistance.
George W.’s coziness with Michelle O. has not gone unnoticed.
Using an argument that even a radical liberal could love, he compares the recent silencing of alternative and conservative opinions online to racial and economic segregation.
Greenfield is careful to point out that the Constitutional First Amendment is limited to protection against abuses by government, not private enterprises.
For this reason, he writes, “…when those enterprises have more power over speech than governments, when their scale is such that they can sweep away entire categories of ideas across the world with the press of a key, a digital First Amendment is needed to maintain the relevance of the Bill of Rights in a new technological era when government censorship is outsourced to corporate partners.”
You could, of course, point out that at this stage, governments are owned by the corporate partners they serve. And you’d be right.
Death, Incorporated. The Internet is a sprawling virtual continent that out-scales every country and corporate media monopoly on the planet in terms of influence and viewership. (Greenfield supports this with multiple statistics – just read the article.)
For the various behemoths currently profiting from this limitless opportunity to claim that they are “private companies” is like the bubonic plague calling itself a cold sore. Big tech can inflict a lot of death on a lot of opinions and facts with a few clicks.
Unforeseen consequences. Imagine yourself a citizen of such an unlikely place from the viewpoint of those who drafted the Constitution. They never foresaw it, but here you are.
You establish your virtual domain and quietly busy yourself furnishing it with windows and doors that open onto unique views. You furnish your domain with as many books and news sources as you can find on the subjects of your choosing and go to work drafting your own articles and essays, inviting comments from the outside world.
And suddenly, you have visitors: Messrs. Madison and Hamilton knock on your door with the intention of hearing what you have to say about something as arcane to them as the Internet: Crisis actors.
“What manner of masque or, to wit, black comedy are such actors engaged in?” asks Madison. Hamilton stands there with a puzzled expression.
Before you can answer, your windpipe is blocked by a sudden gust of ones and zeroes and you and your domain are sucked into the virtual back of the bus — to a dark outer dimension.
And you see at last what the Lords of the Internet intended for you all along: Disconnection. Isolation. Silence.
But as you blow away, you can see Madison and Hamilton down there shaking their capacious heads, wondering what the devil that was all about.
“It must be the return of ignorance and barbarism,” says Hamilton. “Witchcraft,” says Madison.
I agree with them, as I agree with Greenfield: What we need is a digital First Amendment to retain the relevance of the Bill of Rights.
Without it, everyone* will eventually be silenced.
The week of August 12 was a countdown, though to what remains to be seen. I didn’t know it at first. Someone dear to me had died the week before, and I had miles to travel, tasks to finish and people to visit. It never occurred to me that the week following would bring more deaths.
The first happened on August 15th: the original FOTM blog was snuffed out by WordPress.
Then, from the same host, a series of kills: American Everyman, Jays Analysis, 50 Shades of Pissed Off, Fundamental Option, Chem Trails Planet, Government Rag, Dutch Sinse, together with my blog, Cinderella’s Broom. More small, independent blogs, I’m sure, were taken out, sites that shared a mission of exposing false flag operations and hoaxes, notably Sandy Hook.
A few days later, in response to my inquiry, a vaguely worded explanation arrived from WordPress, nearly identical to the one FOTM received:
The death notice was signed as shown:
Sal P.│Community Guardian │WordPress.com
In my case, there were two casualties: three-year-old Cinderella’s Broom and a much older WordPress blog, mixing personal and political topics, which I had voluntarily sealed, marked PRIVATE, with no admission granted without my approval.
Two down. By then it was obvious why WordPress had killed Cinderella’s Broom. It wasn’t because of policy violations (I had never breached the policy in force). It was because someone didn’t like the opinions being expressed and the facts being revealed.
The private blog was another matter. No one was allowed in. Why bother axing what amounted to a sealed coffin?
Two to go. Besides the two dead blogs, I had two others on my WordPress account, each of them artistic in nature without any reference to Sandy Hook, false flag ops or anything remotely political. But given what had happened to the sealed blog, I had to wonder which would be next.
I asked the vague “Sal P.” and got an answer from the phlegmatic “Knox,” who assured me that “transferring your domain to another host will not affect your other sites,” the reason being that, “they are not connected in any way to your domain.”
I wasn’t convinced. I knew I’d been foolish, putting all of my eggs in one basket. I wrote to “Knox,” asking about the private blog. “Did WP violate its own rules and allow others to view my blog who were NOT AUTHORIZED to do so? It’s a question I’m posing now and I’d like an answer.”
That sealed the coffin on the other two blogs. By that evening, I had my answer from the prickly “Fenton” (redaction is mine):
Our decision is final.
The site at ________.wordpress.com was not made open for public viewing. We are suspending your account, and as part of that all sites on your account.
Fenton Community Guardian
WordPress.com | Automattic
The next day, both of the artistic sites were tombstones.
It was obvious that policy violations were not the reason, and equally clear that content wasn’t a factor in these two cases. The motive was one of the oldest in the homicide business: revenge.
It lives. WordPress, like other corporate-owned social media, was never a trustworthy platform for the truth. It was the siren calling out to survivors of the great deception, people willing to take a risk, swim out and grab hold of the rock. Then, when it had us sufficiently attached to its slippery surface, down it took us.
The trouble for the controllers of big-tech media is that too many of us had just enough time to stand up and shout. Inconvenient facts have been disclosed. The truth has been told, and the reports of its death are greatly exaggerated.
On March 6, 1991, in a speech to Congress then-President George H. W Bush famously and very prematurely declared the beginning of a “new world order” following the Gulf War — the U.S.-led expulsion of Iraqi forces from Kuwait:
“Now, we can see a new world coming into view. A world in which there is the very real prospect of a new world order…. A world where the United Nations, freed from cold war stalemate, is poised to fulfill the historic vision of its founders. A world in which freedom and respect for human rights find a home among all nations.”
Three years before in 1988, in an essay in The Economist (which is partly owned by the Rothschild family), Lord Jacob Rothschild, now 82, predicted that in 2018 the world would be united under a single currency, the phoenix.
Under the global monetary union, called the “phoenix zone,” administered by a global central bank, national economic boundaries would dissolve. “Tight constraints” would be imposed on national governments, and there would be no national monetary policy. In effect, nation-states would lose their economic sovereignty, supplanted by a global government — a new world order — in fact if not in name.
Thanks to The Free Thought Project, below is an excerpt from Jacob Rothschild’s article, “Ready for the Phoenix,” The Economist, January 9, 1988, pp. 9-10.
Ready for the Phoenix Thirty years from now, Americans, Japanese, Europeans, and people in many other rich countries, and some relatively poor ones will probably be paying for their shopping with the same currency. Prices will be quoted not in dollars, yen or D-marks but in, let’s say, the phoenix. The phoenix will be favoured by companies and shoppers because it will be more convenient than today’s national currencies, which by then will seem a quaint cause of much disruption to economic life in the last twentieth century.
At the beginning of 1988 this appears an outlandish prediction. Proposals for eventual monetary union proliferated five and ten years ago, but they hardly envisaged the setbacks of 1987. The governments of the big economies tried to move an inch or two towards a more managed system of exchange rates – a logical preliminary, it might seem, to radical monetary reform. For lack of co-operation in their underlying economic policies they bungled it horribly, and provoked the rise in interest rates that brought on the stock market crash of October. These events have chastened exchange-rate reformers. The market crash taught them that the pretence of policy co-operation can be worse than nothing, and that until real co-operation is feasible (i.e., until governments surrender some economic sovereignty) further attempts to peg currencies will flounder. The New World Economy
The biggest change in the world economy since the early 1970’s is that flows of money have replaced trade in goods as the force that drives exchange rates. as a result of the relentless integration of the world’s financial markets, differences in national economic policies can disturb interest rates (or expectations of future interest rates) only slightly, yet still call forth huge transfers of financial assets from one country to another. These transfers swamp the flow of trade revenues in their effect on the demand and supply for different currencies, and hence in their effect on exchange rates. As telecommunications technology continues to advance, these transactions will be cheaper and faster still. With unco-ordinated economic policies, currencies can get only more volatile.…
In all these ways national economic boundaries are slowly dissolving. As the trend continues, the appeal of a currency union across at least the main industrial countries will seem irresistible to everybody except foreign-exchange traders and governments.In the phoenix zone, economic adjustment to shifts in relative prices would happen smoothly and automatically, rather as it does today between different regions within large economies (a brief on pages 74-75 explains how.) The absence of all currency risk would spur trade, investment and employment. The phoenix zone would impose tight constraints on national governments. There would be no such thing, for instance, as a national monetary policy.The world phoenix supply would be fixed by a new central bank, descended perhaps from the IMF. The world inflation rate – and hence, within narrow margins, each national inflation rate- would be in its charge. Each country could use taxes and public spending to offset temporary falls in demand, but it would have to borrow rather than print money to finance its budget deficit. With no recourse to the inflation tax, governments and their creditors would be forced to judge their borrowing and lending plans more carefully than they do today. This means a big loss of economic sovereignty, but the trends that make the phoenix so appealing are taking that sovereignty away in any case. Even in a world of more-or-less floating exchange rates, individual governments have seen their policy independence checked by an unfriendly outside world.
As the next century approaches, the natural forces that are pushing the world towards economic integration will offer governments a broad choice. They can go with the flow, or they can build barricades.Preparing the way for the phoenix will mean fewer pretended agreements on policy and more real ones. It will mean allowing and then actively promoting the private-sector use of an international money alongside existing national monies. That would let people vote with their wallets for the eventual move to full currency union. The phoenix would probably start as a cocktail of national currencies, just as the Special Drawing Right is today. In time, though, its value against national currencies would cease to matter, because people would choose it for its convenience and the stability of its purchasing power.…
The alternative – to preserve policymaking autonomy- would involve a new proliferation of truly draconian controls on trade and capital flows. This course offers governments a splendid time. They could manage exchange-rate movements, deploy monetary and fiscal policy without inhibition, and tackle the resulting bursts of inflation with prices and incomes polices. It is a growth-crippling prospect. Pencil in the phoenix for around 2018, and welcome it when it comes.
[I]t must be noted that the creation of a global currency would give an inordinate amount of geopolitical capital to unelected international bankers, and subsequently take power away from the citizens of each nation and their respective governmental representatives…. Control over a nation’s money supply is, for all intents and purposes, the lifeblood of a state’s sovereignty – without this independence, the state only exists in name but is subservient to supranational powers whose interests lie outside of domestic and national political/economic concerns. “Give me control of a nation’s money supply, and I care not who makes its laws,” said Mayer Amschel Rothschild, founder of the Rothschild banking dynasty.
Although the Rothschild family now generally keep a very low public profile, they still have significant business operations across a wide spectrum of sectors. While you may not find any one particular Rothschild on the Forbes’ most rich list, the family is estimated to control $1 trillion dollars in assets across the globe, thus having a strong voice across the geopolitical spectrum that many perceive as a hidden hand manipulating events silently from behind a veil of secrecy and silence.
Of course, since it is 2018, we now know that Jacob Rothschild’s prediction of 30 years ago did not come true, thanks to the Revolt of the Deplorables who, in 2016, elected a man named Donald Trump to the U.S. presidency, whose campaign promise is to “make America great again” by putting America’s national interests first, which got him eternal enmity from the globalists.
Trump did exactly that in the just-concluded G-7 Summit in Toronto, Canada, in which he fought for fairer trade agreements for the United States, instead of continue the massive trade imbalances and deficits of previous U.S. presidents — to howls from our supposed French, German and Canadian “allies”.
See “Trump won’t endorse G7 statement,” New York Post, June 9, 2018.
God bless President Trump, the wrench in the Rothschilds’ and other globalists’ machinations for a one-world government!
Last November, our Trail Dust published a post, “Adrenochrome and Elite Vampirism,” about AltMedia rumors of elites kidnapping children not just for pedophilia, but to kill them for adrenochrome.
Needless to say, ingesting a human’s adrenochrome is a form of cannibalism.
At the time, cautiously skeptical, I wrote this comment:
Adrenochrome is a chemical compound produced by the oxidation of adrenaline. (Oxidation is the loss of electrons during a reaction by a molecule, atom or ion.)
Every credible source I’ve read on adrenochrome says its effects may be hallucinogenic and psychotropic, and may trigger psychotic reactions such as thought disorder, derealization, and euphoria. Nothing on adrenochrome being rejuvenating or life-extending. Which then beggars the question of why the “elites” would consume adrenochrome. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adrenochrome http://www.chemistrylearner.com/adrenochrome.html
Since the buying and selling of adrenochrome is legal in the United States (it can even be bought online here), the question must be asked why would the “elites” resort to killing children for it? . . .
And if adrenochrome indeed slows the aging process, you can be sure Big Pharma would have manufactured adrenochrome pills to sell to us.
Going by the decrepit appearances of Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, and George Soros, whatever “anti-aging” thing they’re ingesting sure isn’t working.
To which, Trail Dust responded:
My thesis is that the chase for a drug rush from adrenochrome is entirely separate from the quest for rejuvenation. I believe the desire for the fountain of youth is expressed in the evil harvesting of “long” telomeres from aborted or murdered children. And the lust for physical power is directly associated with harvested adrenochrome.
So we have a person in power seeking to reverse aging with baby telomeres, and we have a person seeking a thrill fulfilling it by drinking blood heavily infused with adrenochrome. Sometimes that’s the same person, sometimes the same sacrificed baby providing both substances.
When I was a little child, a friend and I stumbled into a trap set by evil local boys (one is still thought to be genuinely evil 50+ years later) in our neighborhood. We were walking through the woods near our homes when my friend was suddenly hoisted upside down into the air by a noose on his ankle. I immediately identified this as a death trap and burst out towards the nearest safety, which was my friend’s mother’s house. I have never been a super fast runner, even thought then and now I have been athletic. But at that moment my legs moved at seemingly supernatural speed. The enemy kid chasing me could have easily caught me under normal circumstances, but my speed at that moment was beyond anything I have ever experienced. Now, think of a Hollywood actor or producer finding access to a sip of blood from my adrenal gland at that moment of maximal terror at a very young age (I think I was about 7 years old); think of nearly unlimited physical speed for a flight or ferocity for a fight.
People without a good conscience might accept the moral evil for the personal gain. And all that is still separate from the seeking of power through devils by committing the sacrifice of children (the very spiritual crime that finally brought the wrath of God down on the jews).
And my response:
Since it is legal to buy and sell adrenochrome in the U.S. (you can even buy it online), then why the need to obtain adrenochrome by killing children? That makes no sense.
It turns out that eleven years ago, long before Andrenochrome became the stuff of AltMedia chatter, the drug was featured in second episode of Season One of the TV series, Lewis, which was first aired in Britain on February 18, 2007. [Inspector] Lewis is a spin-off from the popular Inspector Morse series.
In Episode Two, “Whom the Gods Would Destroy,” written by Danny Boyle, beginning at about the 1:16:50 mark, DI Lewis and DS Hathaway were searching a suspect’s apartment, in a case concerning the murders of two members of an Oxford University club from 30 years ago — the Sons of the Twice Born (a reference to the Greek god Dionysius). Those murders harken back to the murder of a prostitute 30 years ago by the Oxford club.
In the suspect’s apartment, Hathaway found a note-pad with the imprint of the word “Adrenochrome”.
Hathaway explains: “It’s a drug, a very special drug found in a very special place. To harvest adrenochrome, you have to go to Hell itself. You’ve got to murder for it.”
The scene then cuts to Lewis and Hathaway interrogating the female suspect.
Lewis: “Do you know what adrenochrome is? . . . Adrenochrome is a drug, Tina. And Platt and his crew (referring to the Oxford students club), they thought drugs could work wonders for them, couldn’t get enough of them. And how they wanted to try adrenochrome, but try it in its purest form which, myth has it, gives the highest of highs. But the thing about it is, in its purest form adrenochrome comes from the human adrenal gland. When you remove that, the donor dies.”
It is said that director Stanley Kubrick’s death, at age 70, from a massive heart attack on March 7, 1999, mere days after submitting a final cut to Warner Brothers of his last movie, Eyes Wide Shut, was the Illuminati’s retribution for Kubrick revealing their secrets in the movie. (See “Eyes Wide Shut: Occult Symbolism“)
Here’s a video showing the Illuminati symbology employed by Kubrick in Eyes Wide Shut:
“offered a keyhole view into a clandestine practice in certain powerful circles of French society: secret soirees with lawyers, judges, police officials, journalists and musicians that start with a fine meal and end with naked guests and public sex with multiple partners. […] The exclusive orgies called “parties fines” — lavish Champagne affairs costing around $13,000 each — were organized as a roving international circuit from Paris to Washington by businessmen seeking to ingratiate themselves with Mr. Strauss-Kahn.”
Then there’s that sinister 1972 masked ball thrown by the Rothchilds in the UK. Among the creepy pics of the ball is this photo of a table centerpiece comprised of mutilated baby dolls. Was that a hint at child sacrifice?
If Kubrick’s Eyes Wide Shut indeed is fact-based, then we have reason to suspect that the reference to adrenochrome in the Lewis episode “Whom the Gods Would Destroy” is also fact-based.
The secretive and elitist Bilderberg group are meeting (June 7-10) as we speak at the NH Lingotto hotel in Turin, Italy.
According to RT’s Adrian Salbuchi, Bilderberg is a key group within the Global Power Network — organizations, clubs, lobbies and groups sharing common economic, financial, social and (geo)political objectives in the Globalist Agenda. The Network includes the New York-based Council on Foreign Relations (long-term geopolitical planners), its London-based sister entity Royal Institute of International Affairs (aka “Chatham House”), RAND Corp., CSIS, the American Enterprise Institute (strategic affairs specialists), Tavistock Institute in London (mass psychology research), the Carnegie Endowment, and the Trilateral Commission “umbrella” entity (founded in 1973 by Rockefeller / Morgan / Rothschild interests, geared to coordinating the Americas, Europe and the East). These think-tanks in turn interact with consultancies like Kissinger Associates, The Carlyle Group (specializing in oil strategies and having the Bush, Bin Laden and Baker families as key shareholders), and Trilateralist Claus Schwab’s World Economic Forum.
The Bilderberg group is neither an organization nor a lobby: Its only activity is its annual conference, described on its official website as:
Since its inaugural meeting in 1954, Bilderberg has been an annual forum for informal discussions, designed to foster dialogue between Europe and North America. Every year, between 120-150 political leaders and experts from industry, finance, academia and the media are invited to take part in the meeting. About two thirds of the participants come from Europe and the rest from North America; one third from politics and government and the rest from other fields. The meeting is a forum for informal discussions about megatrends and major issues facing the world. The meetings are held under the Chatham House Rule, which states that participants are free to use the information received, but neither the identity nor the affiliation of the speaker(s) nor of any other participant may be revealed. Thanks to the private nature of the meeting, the participants are not bound by the conventions of their office or by pre-agreed positions. As such, they can take time to listen, reflect and gather insights. There is no detailed agenda, no resolutions are proposed, no votes are taken, and no policy statements are issued.
Note that “religion” is not among the groups represented at the annual Bilderberg meetings.
So it is most curious that the attendants at this year’s Bilderberg conference include the Secretary of State of the Vatican, Cardinal Pietro Parolin — as indicated in the meeting’s list of participants. The Vatican is the papal government of the Catholic Church. No other religious group was invited — no Protestant or Muslim or Buddhist or . . . . Nor, to my knowledge, has an official of a religious group ever been a participant at Bilderberg meetings. Norvos Ordo Watch points out that as the Vatican Secretary of State, Cardinal Pietro Parolin is Pope Francis’ right-hand man, second only to Francis in terms of importance and influence in the Vatican.
This is the first time, as far as we know, that an official of the Catholic Church has been invited to participate in a Bilderberg meeting. In a post covering this news story, Leo Zagami writes that “some say [Parolin] will deliver a secret message written by Pope Francis to his minions”.
This year’s Bilderberg Conference includes these U.S. participants:
Altman, Roger C. (USA), Founder and Senior Chairman, Evercore
Baker, James H. (USA), Director, Office of Net Assessment, Office of the Secretary of Defense
Burns, William J. (USA), President, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Burwell, Sylvia M. (USA), President, American University
Cohen, Jared (USA), Founder and CEO, Jigsaw at Alphabet Inc.
Cook, Charles (USA), Political Analyst, The Cook Political Report
Fallows, James (USA), Writer and Journalist
Ferguson, Jr., Roger W. (USA), President and CEO, TIAA
Ferguson, Niall (USA), Milbank Family Senior Fellow, Hoover Institution, Stanford University
Fischer, Stanley (USA), Former Vice-Chairman, Federal Reserve; Former Governor, Bank of Israel
Goldstein, Rebecca (USA), Visiting Professor, New York University
Ever since Donald Trump assumed the presidency, the U.S. stock markets have been going gangbusters.
Just 16 days ago, on January 17, the Dow Jones industrial average surged more than 300 points to close above 26,000 for the first time in its 121-year history.
And yet yesterday, the Dow Jones industrial average plummeted 665.75 or 666 points to 25,520.96, the biggest one-day points drop in ten years, since Dec. 1, 2008 or the beginning of the Great Recession.
Kevin Dugan reports for the New York Post, Feb. 2, 2018, that “Stock markets had their worst day on Friday since the dawn of the Great Recession, as fears mounted that the Federal Reserve may be forced to act more aggressively to cool down an economy that’s heating up faster than investors expected.”
On a percentage basis, yesterday’s 2.5% drop in the Dow was the biggest since the day after the UK voted to exit the European Union — an event that sent markets in a free-fall the world over.
Prudential Financial chief market strategist Quincy Krosby said:
“We all know that many bull markets have ended by the Federal Reserve as they raise the rates to the point of slowing the economy down perhaps too much. It’s come on quickly and it caught the market off guard.”
Blah, blah, blah.
Krosby neglected, however, to inform you that yesterday, the Federal Reserve had met and decided AGAINST raising interest rates.
Dow’s steep fall yesterday was not a reaction to bad economic news. On the contrary, the U.S. had added 200,000 jobs in January, and wages rose 2.9%.
So what happened yesterday that could have triggered the largest stock market plunge in ten years?
The House Intelligence Committee’s release of the infamous FISA memo, which reveals how the Obama Administration, on the basis of an unverified “dossier” prepared by a former British spook known to be biased against Donald Trump, abused the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act to get a court warrant to conduct electronic surveillance on a Trump advisor. As some had intimated, the contents of the memo should lead to not just the firing of senior FBI-DOJ officials, but their imprisonment.
So who engineered yesterday’s stock market plunge?
On January 3, 2017, responding to MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow‘s description of Trump as “taking these shots, antagonisms, taunting the intelligence community,” Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY)said something quite ominous:
“Let me tell you, you take on the intelligence community, they have six ways from Sunday of getting back at you. So, even for a practical, supposedly hard-nosed businessman, he’s [Trump] being really dumb to do this.”
Two days later, on January 5, 2017, former Sen. Rand Paulobserved that Schumer “is speaking the truth there — better watch out. I think Trump knows about it. That’s why he has private security.” Paul said Trump “will have problems achieving” reform of the intelligence agencies “because there’s so many obstacles and he won’t know who really represents the CIA unless he is well attuned to the deep state because the real orders and assassinations” are given to the CIA by the deep state.
60 Minutes (Australia) is an Australian current affairs program based on the U.S. 60 Minutes of the CBS network.
On July 14, 2015, Australia’s 60 Minutes TV program broadcasted the first episode of a stunning exposé of a global VIP pedophile network involving the highest government officials of the UK and Australia, including members of the British Parliament, cabinet ministers, judges, diplomats and spies.
And yet, nearly two years later, the broadcast caused nary a ripple. Certainly, we in the U.S. did not know about it. Heaven forbid that CBS’ 60 Minutes or any other network would actually report this or rebroadcast the Australia 60 Minutes report.
Below is the video, followed by my summary and transcripted excerpts from the first segment.
Reporter: “Without question, the biggest political scandal Britain has ever faced will be exposed tonight. It involves a secret network of the highest office holders in the land — past and current members of Parliament, cabinet ministers, judges, diplomats, even one of the country’s top spies. These men are accused of some of the most sadistic child sexual abuse imaginable, on hundreds of victims, some as young as eight. More confronting still are claims that children were killed in order to protect this network of predators, including one boy whose father worked at the Australian High Commission in London. For over 40 years, the evil child-predators acted with complete impunity, hiding behind the façade of respectability, but no longer.
They were children, often the most vulnerable, placed in the care of the state only to be betrayed, systematically trafficked to the most powerful men in the land. […] Tonight, three victims speak out.Claims of a monumental cover-up that children were murdered, one of them the 15-year-old son of the Australian High Commissioner’s chauffeur.[…] A sex scandal at the very highest levels of the British government. Child sexual abuse victims come forward to point the finger at very powerful men — serving members of the British Parliament, cabinet ministers, lords, spies, even senior police, incriminated in a VIP pedophile ring for the privileged and powerful. […] British police are now investigating compelling evidence that dozens of children suffered similar fates.”
(1) Richard Kerr
Kerr, now 54 years old, whom the reporter describes as “a clearly damaged man,” said his life began to fall apart when at the age of nine, he was sent to the now infamous Kincora Boys’ Home in Northern Ireland, run by men who would later be convicted of the frequent rape of children in their care. He said the sexual abuse started a week after he arrived in the home. Within a few years, Kerr and other boys from the home were being trafficked around the UK as “playthings” and “boy toys” for pedophiles.
See: Ian Drury, “MI5 ‘hid’ child abuse at boys’ home: Former Army intelligence officer claims security chiefs told him to ‘stop digging’ when he reported possible paedophile ring,” Daily Mail, April 7, 2015.
When Kerr first came to London, the first place to which he was taken to meet “the men who ruled the country” was Dolphin Square, an upmarket apartment complex just minutes from the Houses of Parliament. Kerr recalls, “I was taken here, I was told to sit down on the bed. They started to take my clothes off.”
Reporter: “Richard was brought here to have sex with politicians and other high ranking members of the British establishment, including members of the House of Lords,” some of whom (“older, very old lords’) are still in politics. “Richard was one of dozens of boys and girls, almost all from state institutions, brought to the homes of the rich and powerful to be forced into sex with adults.”
Kerr: “My soul at that time was being destroyed and they took away everything I had, everything I had.”
(2) Esther Baker
Baker, now 32, was sexually abused since she was six years old, when a family member took her to pedophiles, who “would basically single out the girls, pick who they wanted, and then [the girls] would be abused.”
Shown their photographs, Baker positively identified two British politicians who were among her abusers in the early 1990s, saying “We don’t forget those faces, no way”:
A “very senior” British politician, a lord, who Baker said to have sexually abused her over the course of 5 to 6 years.
A “fairly senior member: of a British political party in the House of Commons. Baker positively identified this second man as having sexually abused her, saying “We don’t forget those faces. No way.”
Darren, not his real name and with his face concealed, was 15 years old in a care home when he met Peter Righton, “a senior adviser to the government of child development and secretly a member of the pedophile information exchange — a group campaigning to lower the age of consent for child sex.” Righton supplied boys like Darren to pedophiles in Dolphin Square.
Note: According to Wikipedia, Peter Righton was a child protection expert, social care worker and a convicted child molester, who died in 2007. In 2013, the Metropolitan Police launched Operation Cayacos to investigate claims that Righton was part of an establishment paedophile network.
Darren and “other witnesses” identified one of the pedophiles as Leon Brittan, a former MP and British Home Secretary, who “raped children.” Son of Lithuanian Jews who migrated to Britain before WWII, Brittan died in January 2015.
The reporter says these pedophile cases are now being “taken seriously” by police and by “a new generation of political leaders,” among whom is Conservative MP (Member of Parliament) Zac Goldsmith, who says “There has to be an element of coverup, conspiracy, call it what you want…. I think there is very compelling evidence that very senior people engaged in terrible acts and are protected by the establishment. I have no doubt at all about that. I think the genie is out of the bottle.”
The Alternative Media have long asserted that an international cabal of satanists controls our world.
Now, a credible whistleblower has come forth, testifying to the cabal’s existence.
He is a former elite Dutch banker named Ronald Bernard.
Below is an interview of Bernard in Dutch, with English subtitles, followed by a transcript.
In the interview, Bernard said that he came from a family with an abusive father. In order to survive the abuse, he’d learned to suppress his conscience. He became an entrepreneur, and became interested in the financial world. A contact in that world offered to mentor him, but instructed him that the necessary condition to achieve success in the financial world is that Bernard must put his conscience into the “freezer” — otherwise called a Faustian bargain.
Bernard became a financial success as a facilitator in tax avoidance and currency exchange/money laundering for big players, including banks, governments, multinationals, secret services, and terrorist groups. Through his work, he came to see the connecting dots about which only the top 1% of the pyramid of global elite are privy. That top elite of 8,000 to 8,500 worship Lucifer as their god, regard people as sheep to be used, and manipulate the media so as to conceal how the world really operates.
Bernard became part of that exclusive top 1% and was invited to the elite’s satanic church of “Eyes Wide Shut” Black Mass, naked women and drugs.
By this time, Bernard’s long-dormant conscience had begun to stir after seeing how currency speculation, specifically of the Italian lira, bankrupted a company and drove the owner to commit suicide.
When Bernard was asked to participate in satanic blood sacrifices of children, that was the coup de grâs. Those who participated would be blackmailed by the satanic elite to do their bidding.
Bernard began to refuse assignments. He wanted out, but was trapped. He was physically tortured, to prevent him from revealing names of companies, groups, and individuals. Eventually, he had a complete breakdown and ended up in Intensive Care.
While in IC, Bernard had a near-death experience in which he was outside of his body but “saw” the hospital staff working on his body. That convinced him that he is not just body, but has a soul. It took a full year for his body to recover.
Here’s the transcript of the English translation of the interview: Interviewer: Ronald, you have a very strong background in the financial sector, asset management, deposit trading, as far as I understood. Can you tell us something about your experiences? For how long did you work there? Bernard: Well, my experiences are more complicated than what you mentioned just now. Actually I have been an entrepreneur my entire life. Independence being the key component to me. I have once tried being an employee, but that didn’t work out. Being an entrepreneur, I have seen many sectors, amongst which I have experienced the financial world. All my other companies as an entrepreneur, like my own fashion line for ladies, car-dealership and also import-export, had me involved to such an extent with building up my own fortune, it inherently guided me into the world of finance. Working in import-export, you encounter different currencies and you have to go to the exchange to trade through brokers. One of these brokers said at some point, “Ronald, I’ve been looking at your life for a long time and you are always busy. You earn money, we know, but what is your goal?” I replied: “the only goal I have as an entrepreneur is to earn as much money as I possibly can” because the more money I have, the quicker I can retire, be free and of course have status, basically everything you want in this society. Or at least, that’s what I thought back then. So the broker said: “In that case, stop what you are doing now, stop with all those companies and just start dealing money, go into the financial world.” And that is the beginning of that situation that is connected to your original question. The broker, had a place in the exchange market and he dealt in currencies, deposits, so trading in assets to make money out of differences in interest rates, and that involved the aforementioned asset management. Those three aspects together formed the interesting package I said yes to. He said: “All right, you can take my place here, I’ll train you, introduce you to the network, but in exchange I want 10% of your annual earnings.” So he basically sold me his spot in the financial world and asked a 10% commission which I paid him. I said “Yes, fine with me!” Then he replied: “There is one thing you need to know. If you can’t put your conscience in the proverbial freezer, and I don’t mean on -18 degrees, but on -100, then don’t get involved in this.” Oops! That was the message, “you want a lot of money, you can obtain that, I can help you, but it comes at a great cost, because you cannot do this with a clear conscience.” Well, I laughed at that, I was young and naive. From my youth, from the way I came into life; my far from ideal youth led me to develop a certain view of the world and humanity. Interviewer: What do you mean by that? No warm, loving family? Bernard: My mother always did the best she could to make us feel loved, but she was hampered by that due to the behavior of the father, who caused us to feel more like we lived in a war zone with each other. That isn’t an exemplary situation to grow up in. As a child, growing up like that led me to believe that the world and humanity are far from great. Interviewer: So putting your conscience in the freezer was fitting in as a starting point? Bernard: I was, partially, already used to doing that out of self-preservation, so to put my conscience in the freezer was not an impossible task to me. Interviewer: So it became a survival mechanism to you? Bernard: Yes, yes. And my view of humanity and the world around me wasn’t exactly positive either. I only thought of myself, that’s the way I grew up to be out of self-preservation and I got into the deal. Which meant, that slowly, I build up a customer base. As I improved my skills within the network, I got deeper into the financial world, and then it turns out the world is really small, and you keep noticing that. Even when I was still working in import-export dealing in grain and such, you notice it is just a small circle. And if we talk about the hard core circle in the financial world, I don’t mean Miss Jean at the bank, but the big global flows of money which you use for trading. Interviewer: You are talking about world wide cash flows, so not the Netherlands in particular where you started working? Bernard: The Netherlands do play a distinct part in this story, but the world does not revolve around it. The Netherlands are part of a large global financial system in which you work through the exchange market if you want to do official transactions. And many banks who do the currency exchange get certain assignments from clients, which they can’t get away with easily. Then the need arises for people like me, who were the straw men where big money flows are involved. We used certain financial constructions, international legislation, to move the money in such a way making everything ‘OK.’ So all supervisors, regulatory bodies that are in place world wide, because they are… That no one wakes up seeing what is going on, like a year or two ago, with the scandal around Panama… Interviewer: The Panama Papers. Bernard: Yes. Interviewer: Yes. Bernard: Yes then… Interviewer: Tax evasion? Bernard: I think, well that was about avoiding taxes, tax evasion is when you break all the rules. This had to do with avoiding. But when you see what happened there, I’m like, “guys that is old news, and who are you boring with that?” Because it is peanuts and hardly relevant. However, for the common people, that is great news, but it is not anything big. But it does show there is something very wrong in this world. For example, there are people in the Netherlands, with certain positions, who have bank accounts in Panama with legislation that allows them not to pay taxes in the Netherlands, which is still completely legal. Constructions like that were part of my job, when we had to change currency. We had changes, the first boycotts in Iraq early ’90s, when there was a boycott in Iraq because of the war that started there. And we were confronted with what we called ‘Iraqi-dollar’ — Iraqi-dollars which were actually American dollars. The American dollar has a direct relation to the oil prices which made it a world trading currency backed up by oil. As long as that connection is in place, the dollar has value. Officially, the Iraqi people weren’t allowed to sell their oil due to the boycott. In theory, that is because never before was there such big business in oil, with discounts in this case, because officially it wasn’t allowed… so with discounts it still crossed the borders. Because the energy was always paid in dollars, these Iraqi-dollars had to go somewhere. You couldn’t just take them to the desk at the bank because all the regulations and checks did provide a certain protection, because money laundering and criminality wasn’t anything new back then. Now we call it terrorism, but that was then also the case. So then you need people to take the heat. As straw men you got invited to a bank in, for example, Germany, with basements full of trucks filled with money. Interviewer: Wow! Bernard: And then you think, “Sure… trucks, transports, a busy company.” Then they show you they are all filled to maximum capacity with dollars. And they tell you “We need to get rid of all this cash.” So change them for Pounds, German Marks, this and that, in such way, and it needs to go there and there. Interviewer: Are we now talking about money laundering? Or… Bernard: Well, processing cash. Processing cash in such a way that we can legally reintroduce it into the money circuit. Interviewer: So that was your task? Bernard: That was an assignment my colleagues and I got. Interviewer: Okay. Bernard: You are never alone on an assignment because you cannot do this on your own. It is not possible. We all know Scrooge McDuck scooping money with his shovel, well we literally had to do that over there. It was impossible to process all at once. So then you need to find a way. Cash used to be the predominant way of paying, where nowadays most is digital. But you tried to find a way to process the cash. How do you reintroduce the cash into the circuit so Iraq can deal in its oil without being hampered? Because they are the ones that own the money. Iraq doesn’t want to… Look, you mentioned money laundering, but what it was about the boycott, Iraq had to stick to the rules, and by, you know, everything you want to know about the world, you can know by following the money. That is the bottom line. Everyone can say “blah blah,” but make sure you follow the money, then you’ll find the truth. Same goes for that situation. So the only thing Iraq and their buying partners wanted was to remain free of any accusations. Because the partners who bought it were the ones placing the boycott in the first place. But they are actually all friends on the same side. Everybody thinks there are opposites like good and bad guys in the world, but on the higher levels it is just a game and they are all working together. However, they do have to stick to the rules and regulations, which they themselves have created to keep the rest of society suppressed and make sure that it will not be too crowded at the top. So you have to play by your own rules. So that is what is going on there, is to make sure that nobody can trace you. Apart from the elite themselves, nobody in the lower ranks can find out what really happened. Interviewer: Compartmentalized, that’s how we call it. Bernard: Yes. Interviewer: Everyone knows only his own little piece. Only the elite knows what is happening. Bernard: Yes, but because we were doing the dirty work, we had to know a lot.Because we couldn’t afford to make any mistakes. Interviewer: How high in the pyramid did you get? Were you close to the top of the pyramid? Bernard: Well, we were communicating with them. Interviewer: Okay. Bernard: My ego would have loved it to get to the position of belonging to the top itself. Nowadays we still talk about 8,000-8,500 people who run the entire world. It would have been amazing to get into such a position back then. Interviewer: All right, but if we say the top knows 100%, can you estimate how much you knew and understood of what happened? Bernard: In my work, I had to know 100% of what was going on.There was no other way, because the interests of the people involved were huge. Interviewer: Especially for the top. Bernard: Exactly. If I wouldn’t know all the details I would end up making mistakes.Which would cause a spin-off, because those mistakes would be detected. Then the people that don’t know anything about it would interfere. We are talking about having nerves of steel to function at this level. Interviewer: So did you have nerves of steel? Bernard: Yes, it worked just fine. Interviewer: The freezer worked very well for you… Bernard: Yes, I played at the highest level for about 5 years.And then it was totally over, out and done with. That was a very intense moment for me. Interviewer: That happened suddenly, or was there a reason? Bernard: Well, no, the thing is… I gave a small example of what was involved. So in this case, currency exchange. Dollar to something else, deposited in a safe manner, and managing assets well, so it could grow to rate of return, leading to reinvestments with the money. The level I played at in those 5 years, and that didn’t happen overnight, you need to earn your place. I am skilled at connecting the dots, information in order to achieve a full picture of all the things involved, that need to be taken into account within the playing field. Which is a very detailed process. You stand out when you are gifted in this. This is the reason I was trusted with the full 100% of the information where it concerned my jobs. So I didn’t know about everything they knew, but everything I needed to know regarding the case I was working with colleagues. I was often put in the leading role because I kept a good overview of the situation, and I was good at innovative thinking to solve the problem. I had fun, creating solutions in such a way to always stay ahead and outsmart them, staying within the rules of the game but playing around with them to make everything match up. I loved that game. However, on the other hand you had a great amount of responsibility and you learned more and more about the real world, since through the financial world you learn all of the actual truth. Interviewer: So you say “all”, in what regard? Bernard: Well, your clients give you glimpses of how the world actually works. In hindsight, I still didn’t know everything, but I did know a lot, because my clients were banks who didn’t want blood on their hands. But within those banks there is always a number of people who know damn well what is going on.So like1% within a bank knows the truth of the matter regarding the happenings within the world, which is not surprising considering they are involved in the flows of money. Those are your clients. You also have governments to deal with, multinationals, you have to deal with secret services, and what they now call terrorist organizations. You get all of those groups that are involved with the big money as clients, then you start seeing the connections. So they might be compartmentalized as you just mentioned, regarding knowledge, but because I am in the middle I see how they relate to another; you see the money coming from this place, then going to that place, etc. You keep gaining information and thereby overview of what is really going on. Interviewer: So do you have to serve and keep all of those groups happy, including terrorist organizations, you were trying to keep everybody happy? Bernard: Yes. Interviewer: Dear God! Bernard: Yes. That was my job. Interviewer: Keeping all the balls in the air. Bernard: Yes, indeed. So one of the things that I found out that I did not know before, but now I do, is about secret services; you think they are there to serve and protect a people, country, etc. but they actually turn out to be criminal organizations, to be more precise, the system is heavily so. We are talking about financing wars, creating wars, so basically creating a lot of misery in this world. So lots of conflict. And then I think to myself, if only people knew what the world is really like. Secret services will stop at nothing. Nothing. But they also have their flows of money, because if they are trading in drugs or weapons, or for that matter, people… all that money has to go somewhere. Everything has to be financed. Interviewer: You say “if”, but could you confirm they are doing this? Ronald: All of them. All of them. Interviewer: Yes. Bernard: So the entire world as we think we know it, is just an illusion we believe in. Which is something you find out in this line of work, and where it all went wrong for me, to put it that way. Interviewer: ‘Right’, you mean, finally that is. Bernard: In hindsight, yes it was for the best, but my ‘freezer’ started to malfunction. There were things happening. For example, I went to a different trade market, and one of my colleagues there said: “Ronald, do you remember that case with the Italian lira?” I sometimes mention that during talks as well. “Do you remember those deals?” in which we did massive dumping of the lira, which reduced the value of the currency, which caused a company in Italy to be hit in such a way they went bankrupt. And then you hear at the exchange, “You remember that successful deal with the lira?” I say, “yes.” And then they say, “Did you know that the owner committed suicide and left a family behind?” Interviewer: Things like that… Ouch. Bernard: And back then we laughed at it. Ha ha ha, all together, all of us. We looked down on people, mocked them. It was just a product. Waste. Everything was worthless trash. Nature, the planet, everything could burn and break. Interviewer: Just useless parasites. Bernard: Just as long as we met our goals, as long as we were growing. Many of my colleagues ended up drinking or using drugs. Not me. Maybe I should have. Interviewer: Or not. Bernard: No, in hindsight, it was for the best and I’m happy to still be alive. However, all those horrible things started to eat at me. Interviewer: Can you give an example, because I can sense a lot of terrible things happened to you. Bernard: Yes, it is a difficult part for me to talk about. Interviewer: I can feel that, but only whatever you wish to share is all right. Bernard: Yes, I only talk about things I want to tell. But it does evoke lots of emotions and with my conscience not being in the freezer it touches me deeply. Interviewer: Can you tell me the worst thing that has happened that caused the tipping point in your situation? Bernard: Well, that was the beginning of the end. You get so deep into these circles, and you sign a lifetime contract. Not with blood or anything. To never disclose names of companies, organizations or people. I think that is why I am still alive. You have to stick to it. If we are talking about the worst things that I have experienced… I just told you about things that made the freezer glitch, my conscience started to show itself. Let’s put it this way, I was training to become a psychopath, and I failed. I did not complete the training, and didn’t become a psychopath. My conscience came back and the most difficult part for me was, because I had such a great status there, I was a success, I was trusted with the people playing at this level. To put it carefully, most of these people followed a not very mainstream religion. So you have Catholics, Protestants, all sorts of religions. These people, most of them, were Luciferians. And you can say “religion is a fairy tale, God doesn’t exist, none of that is real.” Well, for these people, it is truth and reality, and they served something immaterial, what they called Lucifer.And I was also in contact with those circles, only I laughed at it because to me they were just clients. So I went to places called Churches of Satan. Interviewer: So now we are talking about Satanism? Bernard: Yes, so I visited these churches, just as a visitor, dropped by, and they were doing their Holy Mass with naked women and liquor and stuff. And it just amused me. I didn’t believe in any of this stuff, and was far from convinced if any of this was real. Interviewer: It was just a spectacle to you. Bernard: Yes, in my opinion the darkness and evil is within the people themselves. I didn’t make the connection yet. So I was a guest in those circles and it amused me greatly to see all those naked women and the other things. It was the good life. But then at some point, which is why I’m telling you all this, I was invited to participate in sacrifices… abroad. That was the breaking point. Children. Interviewer: You were asked to do that? Bernard: Yes, and I couldn’t do that. Interviewer: Would you like to stop for a moment by the way? Bernard: No. And then I started to slowly break down. I lived through quite a lot as a child myself and this really touched me deeply. Everything changed. But that is the world I found myself in. And then I started to refuse assignments within my job. I could no longer do it. Which made me a threat. Interviewer: For them, of course. Bernard: I was no longer capable of functioning optimally. My performance started to shake and I had refused tasks. I had not participated. The purpose of the whole thing, eventually, in that world, is that they have everybody in their pocket. You need to be susceptible to blackmail. And blackmailing me proved to be very hard if I look back on it. They wanted to do that through those children. And that broke me. Interviewer: Is that – you are not telling me something new – what they also do in politics? Bernard: If you google this, you’ll find enough worldwide witness accounts to know this isn’t a Walt Disney fairy tale. Unfortunately the truth is that worldwide they have been doing this for thousands of years. I once studied theology and even in the Bible you find references to these practices with Israelites. The reason the first 10 tribes were banished to Babylonia was because of these rituals with children. Including the sacrificing of children.So this is pertinent, all this made me believe, because I realized there was more to life than meets the eye. There is a whole invisible world. It is real. You really do talk about a dark force and a manifestation of light. So I resorted to studying theology to make sense of it all. Interviewer: And psychology as well if I remember correctly? Bernard: Yes, but I did that in my first life. Because through commercial psychology, mass psychology, I was able to manipulate situations for my own benefit. Interviewer: That is scary, because if you dig into that you find Tavistock Institute and mind control, MK Ultra, Monarch and the like… Bernard: Yes, that is correct, but that was all part of the job. Through training at the job I got into that more deeply, because when you are making deals you also need to manipulate the media. You have to manipulate lots of things because nothing can be seen as it is. Everything has to appear to be something different. You see the people as a flock of sheep. You put a couple Border Collies and drive them in a direction. And to be honest with you, I still see that happening around me. People are still, through the systems and methods that we ourselves used to use, being treated in that same way. And it still works. People still don’t understand how it really works and are still on the level of “as long as I have my beer” and whatever, completely self absorbed, also a survival mechanism. I mean it is the program after all, but you still see how stupidly easy it is to put people in a certain direction.When you are the one pulling the strings, that is. Interviewer: Mass psychology. Bernard: Yes. Much later in all those studies and discoveries I found a document, which they are claiming is bullshit of course, the Protocols of Zion.And nowadays I recommend everyone to read the whole of that incredibly boring document. Just work through it, read it through. Interviewer: We are also talking about Zionism. Bernard: Yes, of course. If you read the Protocols of Zion, and really study them and understand, then it is like reading the newspaper of the daily life. How from their position of ultimate power, and ultimate it has literally become, but that is only because the people don’t stand up for themselves. They don’t realize what reality is. Interviewer: And we have all been programmed. If you dare say you are against Zionism, then you are branded an anti-Semite. Bernard: The negative, you can say evil, the Luciferians, Satanists, whatever you which you call it… it is a real entity. I have found that what is written in the Bible, and not just the Bible, you can find it in so many books, there really has been a moment of separation from the manifestation of light, in which a group went their own way and are carrying an intense hatred, anger; the people who do not underestimate the severity of this are but few. Because this is an all annihilating force that hates our guts. It hates creation, it hates life. It will do anything to destroy us completely, and the way to do that is to divide humanity. Divide and conquer is their truth. Humanity is a manifestation of light. That is the true creation. As long as you divide them based on political parties, skin color, you name it… then you – from a Luciferian point of view that is – suppress the full capacities of your enemy, their full power. They can’t stand up for themselves, because if that would happen, the Luciferians would lose. Then this monster, the greedy monster would disappear. I tell people about this old American general who puts an entire room of people in the dark. The eyes adapt to the darkness, but you can’t see a thing. The general doesn’t say a word and suddenly he flicks on a lighter. One little light. Due to the prolonged darkness, you experience a manifestation of light from a single point and everyone can slightly see each other again. And then he says “that is the power of our light.” Interviewer: Beautiful. Bernard: Unite. Unite. Come together, and this entire shit story seizes to exist. That’s how fast it could happen. But that is easy for me to say now, but then I was in a period of my life in which I was crumbling down. Interviewer: Could you tell us something specific about that? Bernard: I started to refuse assignments. My conscience came back after the request involving the children and I started to refuse more and more. I had a conscience and I couldn’t function anymore. Interviewer: But you did still show up to work after that? Bernard: I didn’t really have a choice, I had my own business with several offices and employees, everything was still rolling. Interviewer: That must have been hard. Bernard: Yes, it got very hard, all the tensions. So on the one hand, you are playing with money on a high level, in which you can’t afford to make mistakes, otherwise everything falls down at once, your entire business is ruined, everybody involved, including yourself. Then you are really screwed. So that brings a lot of stress, factoring in the resurfacing of a conscience. I was warned off when I got into this. “Don’t do it if you can’t put your conscience at -100 degrees in the freezer.” Interviewer: And you probably realized that then? Bernard: Yes, I heard myself laugh at it back then, but it wasn’t a joke at all. I totally did not understand where I really got into. Interviewer: And your proverbial freezer was switched off? Bernard: Broken. I couldn’t do it anymore. So I tried to work through it, keep up appearances. I didn’t know how to get out of this, I was trapped as well. Everybody was trapped. This all led me to crashing completely eventually. My body just simply stopped. The first thing I saw was my mother crying at the Intensive Care. Interviewer: You ended up at the IC? Bernard: Yeah, I really shut down. Interviewer: You had literally crashed? Bernard: Yes. Yes. And… at that time I didn’t believe in anything, but I can still recall how I saw, from that corner, I was looking down upon myself. I saw how they were working on me. Interviewer: You had a near death experience. Bernard: Well, you could call it that. I have seen I am not my body. I’m “in” my body, but I am not just my body. I have seen them working on me.And later on, I’ve been reluctant to talk about it for a long time. I really talked about it much later. But when I did, I had researched so many things already and started to believe. I was starting to better understand the spiritual and the material. At that point this intense experience got its own place. The realization that I’m not my body, it’s just a vessel. So I lived through all of that, but I also needed a long time to recover. Interviewer: Yes, of course. Bernard: Yes I was a train wreck. Complete wreck. I was completely burned out. I had crashed, and the body needed a year to recover.I don’t really want to get into it now, but in those circles I got tortured physically during my exit time. This was in order to make sure I would never break the contract of secrecy. So I was taken for a certain amount of time. I was “treated.” All those factors together, just increased the stress I was experiencing, literally running full speed towards my own end. Interviewer: Do you mean abductions, as we call it, or programming? Bernard: No, they exposed me to certain types of torture that makes sure you’ll never damage anyone in that world. It did all happen that way, so the end of my first life was so extreme that I couldn’t handle it anymore. I couldn’t handle it anymore, in no way. However, my mind power was so strong, that it only happened with and to my own body. That was… well, I didn’t know what to do anymore. There were no options left for me. So that is why sometimes I think – of course it is not true – but I wish, like so many colleagues, I had taken the drugs and alcohol route. At least my end would have been more gentle. Most of them are just dead by now. Even though I know there are more straw men walking around, there are little still alive whom I knew back then. Most of them are already gone. Well I was dead too, but I’m still here. Interviewer: So you still have something left to do. Bernard: Yes, I suppose you could say that. But that is, I can’t say in short, since I don’t know how long we have been talking, the world that I found myself in. If you have any specific questions, then I can answer them, but I had hoped to be more concise. But I just don’t know how. Interviewer: Well, you have my gratitude for all you have shared. Bernard: To me, it is a very big deal.
Ronald Bernard is now engaged in a “citizens’ initiative” called Bank of Joy, of which he’s the founder.
Bank of Joy provides interest-free financing for life-enhancing local and sustainable projects. Bank of Joy invites anyone to join:
“For 25 euro you can join in. For 100 euro you can become part-owner. “
At the end of a promotional video on the Bank of Joy, you can see Bernard in a group of men and women walking toward the camera.