Possession Is 9/10 Of Inter-Galactic Genetic IP Law

Creepy observation in this audio segment by Dr. Joseph Farrell. If the ancient texts (Sumerian and Vedic I guess) are faithful, then the records describing us as genetically rewired may be robust enough for a court case. Our alleged off-planet male gene contributors (often referred to as the Anunnaki), say that they created us to be their worker slaves and is supported by Michael Tellinger's extensive work. Should they return to Earth as they say they will, then under U.S. genetic patent guidelines, the ancient texts would qualify to be adjudicated, under our laws and a patent issued to the Anunnaki for humankind to legally be defined as property.

Just in case the bastards try it on, I'm appealing to a higher authority  over my genetic I.P and unconditionally reject any claims over me. However I believe substantial numbers of the consumer materialist populations are fully p0wned by much lesser authorities than advanced off planet geneticists and would willingly hit the 'Like' Anunnaki button in Facebook and sign over their DNA for some branded tennis shoes, marginally improved career prospects or even a little cash. These specimens you can have. They're spoiling the gene pool. It's only a fifteen minute clip and is a nice intro into Joseph's fascinating work.

Update: The original video deleted. 

I Worry About The United States

Two fresh video uploads that bring to life my very real concerns. The second video concerns the recent National Defence Act legislation passed by the Senate changing the laws over who can be arrested is troubling. I understand the U.S. media has failed to address the implications and that we're back in Bush 43 land whereby only a handful of people are pointing out the dangers of giving the Pentagon 600 Billion to police it's own taxpayers. The ability to control and reign in U.S. citizens with military justice on American soil is troubling as the level of political discourse on Twitter by people who should at the very minimum be raising a large flapping-in-the-wind collective question mark flag in unison over this is negligible.

I ask myself why people aren't concerned and the only answer I have (and please comment if there's a better idea) is that both parties rubber stamped the legislation so far and without the usual hair pulling and teeth gnashing the electorate, seems to be untroubled by the implications.

It's as if there is still an implicit trust in the political mechanisms and representatives to be the guard dog of democratic representation when I thought it was evident that the lap dogs of corporate and security complex interests collaborate like a dream team from heaven when the lobbyists spread the dough evenly enough to forward dangerous laws that are threats to freedom. I shouldn't care about these issues but I do. This is the kind of change many of us warned would precipitate great danger. Let's be candid now. Both the U.S. and the E.U print mickey mouse worthless money and extract wealth from the rest of the world behind a loaded gun. That's an over simplification but NATO's love bombs on Libya and hands off over Syria is as good as it's going to get to dramatise that reality.

Lately I've been reconsidering the story of time traveller John Titor's prescient warnings on the internet over a decade ago. He chastised the U.S. electorate on internet forums he attended for being lazy, self absorbed citizens who watched their constitution being chiselled away at with little protest as long as the materialist and celebrity obsessed appetite was being fed.  Easy to ridicule except for his prediction of Youtube long before it existed and those twin counter rotating black hole technology descriptors he used that only accumulates more robustness as a scientific idea as time rolls by. 

And folks. It's rolling.

Adam Curtis On Chuck Norris & Scripted Anti-Intellectualism

Adam Curtis writes in his latest post on the relationship between Hollywood and Chuck Norris's views on the manufactured war on terror. It's a bit disappointing that Curtis appears  to be uninformed over the Pentagon's direct say in the scripts of movies that use war hardware from the department of rabid dog tax-parasi.... I mean defence. The observant will have picked up that the demonizing of Muslims commenced promptly after the Berlin Wall came down as the end of Communism was disastrous for the war business. Adam Curtis is being semi flippant on Norris commentary, but I'm serious. War is contrived and enemies are conjured up to justify the human sacrifice of conflict. The elite don't spill their blood. There's no need to when they paint the reality needed to motivate the poorly educated young men who invariably join the military. It's genius really.....if it wasn't psychopathy.

Adam Curtis Writes

I love the section about the making of Delta Force where Chuck Norris in an interview explains how the film tries to show what America's response to Arab terrorism should be in the future:

"I think terrorism is going to get greater all over the world, and I think it's time we started doing something about it right now rather than waiting till it gets a lot worse."

The aim of the film, Norris says, is to show America how to do this retaliation - through what he calls "positive violence". As opposed to "negative violence" - which is what the terrorists do.

Along with George Walker's use of film and celebrity to fake profits in order to do takeover deals, you begin to wonder whether the whole of the subsequent economic and foreign policy of Britain and the United States wasn't created by the rubbish movies of the 1980s.

NB: There's no point holding Chuck Norris accountable. It's evident he's a tragic tool in the strictest as well as most liberal senses of the word.