Health v medicine  


The Bible exposed  

Biblical contradictions  

The Jesus myth 

US Govt's agenda  

The most evil people in the world 

Fake apocalypse 

Billy Graham   

Clarifying what is proof  

Council of Nicea 325 AD      

Reincarnation & karma  




Universal laws  









GW / Climate change hoax ] Propaganda ] Fake terror ] Covert operations ] Water agenda ] Corporations ] Sandy Hook massacre & gunlaws ] NESARA ] new world order ] Science ] Money ] Hidden technology ] Illuminati ] Feminism ] Fake mental health ] Scientology ] Sovereignty ] Religion ] Zionism ] The Galactic Federation ] A new paradigm ] Quotes ] Reading ] Links ]


"When you have ruled out the impossible, then whatever remains, no matter how improbable, is the truth."  

-- Detective writer Arthur Conan-Doyle, 
author of the Sherlock Holmes series


Most people fail to use logical reasoning processes to determine the truth of a matter

 87% of people don't think for themselves 

Approximately 10% think things out for themselves


The reasoning process

We are all products of our cultural and social conditioning to some extent and it is generally considered that progressive changes in culture are the natural result of the evolution of our society. It may come as a surprise to discover that the illuminati have had think tanks, behavioural scientists and professional opinion makers working very hard to push their agenda on to an unsuspecting world. 

The very nature of our existence as a race has been played around with and manipulated for a long time, possibly since ancient Egypt. (The illuminati are probably a more recent manifestation of a force that has been operating for much longer to control and manipulate.) The goal of the illuminati is to lead us down the road to a totalitarian dictatorship under a one world government where personal liberties are gone and every country and person is subject to their control. 

Its entirely probable that most ideas commonly held by society are nothing but a product of these manipulations.  We need to take back our thinking processes and stop taking the word of "experts" and "reliable sources".

A rational approach to life is based on sound reasoning -- not emotional reactions or conditioned responses. 

Most people have built in "slides" that short circuit the mind’s critical examination process when it comes to certain sensitive topics. "Slides" is a CIA term for a conditioned type of response which dead-ends a person’s thinking, and terminates debate or examination of the topic. For example, the mention of the word "conspiracy" usually solicits a slide response with many people.  
--Fritz Springmeier, author of The Top 13 Illuminati Bloodlines and de-programmer http://www.newworldpeace.com/911menu3.html




Sinbad's bullshit detector

Logic n. Science of Reasoning; proof, thinking, or inference [Concise OED].

Logic allows us to analyse a piece of reasoning and determine whether it is correct or not (valid or invalid).

The building blocks of a Logical argument are Propositions (Statements). A Proposition can be Asserted (said to be True) or Denied (Said to be False).

An argument consists of three stages.

First of all, the propositions which are necessary for the argument to continue are stated. These are called the premises of the argument. They are the evidence or reasons for accepting the argument and its conclusions.
Next, the premises are used to derive further propositions by a process known as inference. In inference, one proposition is arrived at on the basis of one or more other propositions already accepted.
Finally, we arrive at the conclusion of the argument -- the proposition which is affirmed on the basis of the premises and inference. The conclusion is often stated as the final stage of inference.

A sound argument is a valid argument whose premises are true. A sound argument therefore arrives at a true conclusion. Be careful not to confuse valid arguments with sound arguments.

The point of an argument is to give reasons in support of some conclusion. An argument commits a fallacy when the reasons offered do not, in fact, support the conclusion.

See website for a list of logical fallacies -http://www.think.i12.com/fallacies.html#PrejudicialLanguage

Logic of the mole 

Implies a one dimensional linear approach to problem solving that rules out other levels of intelligence. In the case of the mole for example, surface area, volume etc.



Conspirators' Hierarchy: The story of the Committee of 300
By Dr John Coleman

Opinion-makers have played no-small-part in this war on the United States; we need to examine the role of the Committee of 300 in bringing-about these far-reaching changes and how the social-engineers have used central-systems-analyses to keep public-opinion from expressing anything other than the policies of the invisible government. How and where did it all begin?

From documents covering the First World War that I was able to gather and examine in the War Office in Whitehall, London, it appears that the Royal Institute for International Affairs was commissioned by the Committee of 300 to do a study of manipulating war-information. This task was given to Lord Northcliffe and Lord Rothmere and Arnold Toynbee, who was MI6's agent at the RIIA. Lord Rothmere's family owned a newspaper which was used to support various government positions, so it was thought that the paper could change public-perceptions, especially among the ranks of growing opposition to the war.

The project was housed in Wellington House, named after the Duke of Wellesly. American specialists drafted to help Lords Rothmere and Northcliffe included Edward Bernays and Walter Lippmann. The group held "brain storming" sessions to work-out techniques for mobilizing mass-support for the war, especially among the working-class people whose sons were expected to go to the slaughter-fields of Flanders in record-numbers.

Using Lord Rothmere's newspaper, new manipulative techniques were tried-out and, after a period of about 6 months, it was apparent that they were a success. What the researchers discovered was that only a very small group of people understood the process of reasoning and the ability to observe the problem as opposed to passing an opinion on it. This, said Lord Rothmere, was the way in which 87% of the British public approached the war, and that the same principle applied not only to the war, but to every conceivable problem in society in general.

In this manner, irrationality was elevated to a high level of public-consciousness. The manipulators then played-upon this to undermine and distract the public's grasp of reality governing any given situation and, the more complex the problems of a modern industrial society became, the easier it became to bring greater and greater distractions to bear, so that what we ended-up-with was that the absolutely-inconsequential-opinions of masses of people, created by skilled-manipulators, assumed the position of scientific-fact.

Having literally stumbled upon so profound a conclusion, the manipulators put it to one test after another during the war, so that in spite of hundreds of thousands of the youth of Britain being slaughtered on the battlefields of France, there was virtually no opposition to the bloody war. Records of the time show that by 1917, just before the United States entered the war, 94% of the British working-class bearing the brunt of the war did not have the faintest idea what they were fighting for, other than the image created by the media-manipulators that the Germans were a horrible race, bent upon destroying their monarch and their country, and who had to be wiped off the face of the earth.

Certainly nothing has changed because, in 1991, we had the exact same situation created by the news-media which allowed President Bush to flagrantly violate the Constitution in waging a war-of-genocide against the nation of Iraq with the full consent of 87% of the American people.

On instructions from President Wilson, or rather Colonel House, the Creel Commission was created and, as far as can be ascertained, the Creel Commission was the first organization in the United States to use the RIIA techniques and methodology for polling and mass-propaganda. The psychological-warfare experiments perfected at Wellington House were used in the Second World War with equal success, and have been in continuous use in the massive psychological-war against the United States which began in 1946. The methods did not change, only the target. Now it was not German worker-housing but the middle class of the United States that became the focus of the attack.

As so often happens, the conspirators could not contain their glee. After WW I, in 1922 to be precise, Lippmann detailed the work done by the RIIA in a book he called "PUBLIC OPINION":

"Public opinion deals with indirect, unseen and puzzling facts, and there is nothing obvious about them. The situations to which public opinion refers are known only as opinions, pictures inside heads of human+beings, pictures of themselves, of others, of their needs, purposes and relationships, are their public-opinions. These pictures which are acted-upon by groups of people, or by individuals acting in the name of groups are PUBLIC OPINION with capital letters. The picture inside the head often misleads men in their dealings with the world outside of their heads."

The Skill Of Lying, The Art Of Deceit 
by Fritz Springmeier


The Illuminati have refined the art of deception far beyond what the common man has imagined. The very life & liberty of humanity requires the unmasking of their deceptions. That is what this book is about. Honesty is a necessary ingredient for any society to function successfully. Deception has become a national pastime, starting with our business and political leaders and cascading down to the grass roots. The deceptions of the Illuminati's mind-control may be hidden, but in their wake they are leaving tidal waves of distrust that are destroying America. While the CIA pretend to have our nation's best interest at heart, anyone who has seriously studied the consequences of deception on a society will tell you that deception will seriously damage any society until it collapses. 

Lies seriously damage a community, because trust and honesty are essential to communication and productivity. Trust in some form is a foundation upon which humans build relationships. When trust is shattered human institutions collapse. If a person distrusts the words of another person, he will have difficulty also trusting that the person will treat him fairly, have his best interests at heart, and refrain from harming him. With such fears, an atmosphere of death is created that will eventually work to destroy or wear down the cooperation that people need. The millions of victims of total mind-control are stripped of all trust, and they quietly spread their fears and distrust on a subconscious level throughout society. One problem about lies is that one lie will call for another and then another. It's hard to keep lies single. They seem to want to breed more of their kind to protect themselves. 

Soon the liar becomes a victim of his own lies, trapped in a dishonest web that demands lots of energy to protect his false fronts. This is the sad fate that the intelligence agencies have painted themselves into. They must maintain groups that oversee their double-agents' lies to insure that the lies that they have disseminated don't contradict themselves. Finally, they have put out so much disinformation, they lose track of reality themselves. Far from saving this nation, the intelligence agencies have spread the cancer of deception into all walks of life, so that this cancer is contaminating and killing anything of value in the United States. The soon-to-come death of this nation's sovereignty, as well as the destruction of this nation's morals are the results of this cancer. 


Knowledge is power, and lies diminish the knowledge of deceived dupes, and therefore diminishes the power of the deceived. Deception obscures the alternatives that people have. It also clouds up various objectives people would work toward. Some people give up certain objectives due to their mis-perceptions that the objective is undesirable or unattainable.


The War's On and the Front Line's Your Brain

"You may not be interested in war, but war is interested in you" 
--Leon Trotsky

"The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media."  --William Colby, former CIA Director



1)  Do you stand by your convictions, or do you routinely change your opinions when you find out that most people think the opposite way?

2)  Do you research things yourself, or do you trust others to do the work for you?

3)  Do you fall for the statistics, "experts", and official opinions quoted by others without checking these sources out?

4)  Do you feel that you have to quote these same sources whenever you say anything? Does it make you feel uncomfortable just to state an opinion simply because you personally believe it?

5)  Do you believe that the majority is always correct, and because of this, it is advantageous to see how most people act before you make your decisions?

If you aren't in charge of your own thoughts and opinions, than someone else is. You have an opinion you say? 
How can you be sure it's really yours?

"The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist." Verbal Kint from The Usual Suspects

Does a person who is brain washed know that he is brainwashed?

No. That simple realization is the beginning of mental freedom.

Only a Fool Feels Secure in a Fool's Paradise

How are you being manipulated?

1)  Pressure from above and below

This form of manipulation is based on a knowledge of human nature. It's a fact that most people want to be on the winning side. If it can be made to seem that "most people" support an idea, the vast percentage of a population will jump on the bandwagon in spite of the population's original opinions. First, you create the impression from above; someone in government or in the media touts an idea. Then you push the idea from below: any demonstration or grass roots activity that you can highlighted in the press can be used to give the impression that the average person supports the idea. You've now "sandwiched" the majority of the population. The average man looks above him and sees support for the idea.. he looks below and sees support there also. He will then ask himself, "Am I the only one who thinks this is crazy?" and, because an impression of vast support has been created (by a small number of people), the average citizen will then begin to change his opinion. Manipulators know, that as far as control is concerned, it doesn't matter what the truth is if you can create a belief in your target audience.

2)  Through the creation of a false "prominence of being"

This is manipulation through exposure. The more a population is exposed to something, the more that population will think that the thing is important or prevalent. Unfortunately, what that population doesn't realize is that the expressed idea or opinion isn't very important or prominent at all. That impression is only being given to them through "control of exposure time". The longer the exposure can be maintained, the more likely it is that peoples' opinions will actually change. Why? Because people want to be on the winning side.

3)  By appeals to emotion in spite of a person's or organization's actions

Prominent psychologists (Kolberg among them) have suggested that only ten percent of the population ever reason at the highest, or adult level. It's a sad fact that most people decide what is true and what is not true by consciously or unconsciously basing their opinions on what makes them feel good at the moment. "It feels good, so it must be true." Psychologists have identified this as one of the "cognitive distortions" (or thinking errors). If you regularly engage in this cognitive distortion then you have opened yourself up to being manipulated by those that will utilize this weakness. Those that are most easily manipulated say, "I feel it so it must be so." Those that reason at the adult level say, "I want to know the truth in spite of how I may feel right now. If my emotions conflict with the truth, I will work on lining my emotions up with what I now know is going on."

4)  Through a belief in "collectivism"

This is the belief that individuals exist for the service of, or benefit of, larger organizations. "Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country." This lie belittles the importance of the individual and benefits those already in power and those who use institutions of government and media for their own selfish purposes. Collectivism also creates the illusion that the individual is obsolete as a power base, when in fact, a society is only as strong as its individuals, and all great ideas, things, and organizations are started and maintained by strong individuals. A belief in collectivism also falsely promotes the idea that great things can't be done by the common man; great things must always be done through existing institutions and already powerful organizations. Again, this is a lie being sold to keep those in power from being challenged. The destructiveness of collectivism doesn't end there. It is also used to justify unjust laws in the guise of "public safety" and lowers all of society to the lowest common denominator. If someone abuses their free agency and commits a crime in one location, because we are now mentally joined in a collective, laws must be created that now "protect" (in reality "punish") everyone everywhere. Even a child knows that it's wrong for one person to be punished for the actions of another. But through the promotion of collectivism, even intelligent individuals are fooled into believing that these same actions performed through law and organizations are now right and justified.

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety" --Ben Franklin

5)  Through word manipulation and hypnotic speech

How you every noticed that many of those who promote being "open minded" are only interested in having you be open minded to their ideas, while they feel perfectly justified in maneuvering for a monopoly of opinion? One of the ways they do this is through word manipulation. The idea is to immediately label your opponent with an unsavory term, thereby letting people's already negative feeling ties to that term do the work for you. Those who aren't interested in fairness and the pursuit of truth use this tactic to slant an argument in their favor by ensuring that the opposing side is never even considered. Many of those who recognize the unfairness of stereotyping don't realize that they are engaging in the exact tactic they profess to hate when they simplify an opponent's opinions to unsavory sound bites and discounting terminology. This tactic is hypnotic in that it drops people into feeling states immediately and bypassed an individual's conscious reasoning abilities. If an idea is right it will stand on its own; only questionable ideas need the support of inflammatory speech patterns.

6)  Through the use of the "sandwich smear"

This is also known as the "propaganda of the lump". This is the technique of lumping legitimate groups with good ideas together with violent, racist, or radical groups that have already been discounted. The legitimate group suffers from the created association when no actual association exists. This is a common tactic used by today's media. By mentioning a good group in the same breath as a despicable one--or better yet, "sandwiched" in speech or print between two despicable groups--the manipulators bamboozles the target audience into associating the negative feeling it has for the bad group with the group that is now being unfairly persecuted.

7)  Through slant and omission.

These go hand in hand with creating a false prominence of being. Think of it this way: if a baseball player strikes out 9 out of 10 times but I only highlight and mention the time he got a hit, I will give the impression that he is a better baseball player than he really is. People are manipulated constantly with this technique and are often kept from more correct views of reality because they have only been shown events and news stories that aren't typical of what is generally happening.

See Greenops website for more manipulation tactics

Those who are intellectually honest spend their time and energy in the pursuit of truth. Those who are easily manipulated, are in the pursuit of self justification and short-term emotional pleasure. Are you intellectually honest? Are you willing to forego short-term pleasure for long-term happiness?

The Reinforcement's Gazette

Books to Read

 1)  And Not a Shot is Fired - 
    by Jan Kozak
This is a heck of a book and is a must reading. This book details how the communists took over Czechoslovakia at the end of WWII. That was then and this is now, right? WRONG. The tactics they used are being used on you.

2)  Masters of Deceit - 
    by J. Edgar Hoover
Many "communist tactics" are still being used today on unsuspecting individuals and cultures. Read this book and learn what these tactics are. Remember, the best way to defeat an enemy is to know that enemy.

3)  The Law - 
    by Frederic Bastiat
This is the political education you never received in school. I challenge you to quibble with Bastiat's reasoning. It's an exercise in futility because his reasoning is rock solid.

4)  Changing Commands - 
    by John F. McManus
This book gives you an alternative view of history since WWII. Read it and then verify what it says through other sources. If what you find out doesn't make you question what you've been taught, quick!, check your pulse.. you may be dead.



This Awareness indicates the Law of Honesty is that Law which sees things as they are, without an attempt to alter that which is seen, either for purposes of advantage or out of fear.


A little hard to believe?  
How new beliefs have a ripple effect throughout a person's thinking as cognitions are adjusted to fit the new information. 

The theory of cognitive dissonance

Cognitive Dissonance Theory, developed by Leon Festinger (1957), is concerned with the relationships among cognitions. A cognition, for the purpose of this theory, may be thought of as a "piece of knowledge". The knowledge may be about an attitude, an emotion, a behavior, a value, and so on. For example, the knowledge that you like the color red is a cognition; the knowledge that you caught a touchdown pass is a cognition; the knowledge that the Supreme Court outlawed school segregation is a cognition. People hold a multitude of cognitions simultaneously, and these cognitions form irrelevant, consonant [agreeable] or dissonant [disagreeable] relationships with one another.

Cognitive Irrelevance probably describes the bulk of the relationships among a personšs cognitions. Irrelevance simply means that the two cognitions have nothing to do with each other. Two cognitions are consonant if one cognition follows from, or fits with, the other. People like consonance among their cognitions. We do not know whether this stems from the nature of the human organism or whether it is learned during the process of socialization, but people appear to prefer cognitions that fit together to those that do not. It is this simple observation that gives the theory of cognitive dissonance its interesting form.

Two cognitions are said to be dissonant if one cognition follows from the opposite of another. What happens to people when they discover dissonant cognitions? The answer to this question forms the basic postulate of Festingeršs theory. A person who has dissonant or discrepant cognitions is said to be in a state of psychological dissonance, which is experienced as unpleasant psychological tension. This tension state has drive-like properties that are much like those of hunger and thirst. When a person has been deprived of food for several hours, he/she experiences unpleasant tension and is driven to reduce the unpleasant tension state that results. Reducing the psychological sate of dissonance is not as simple as eating or drinking however.

To understand the alternatives open to an individual in a state of dissonance, we must first understand the factors that affect the magnitude of dissonance arousal. First, in its simplest form, dissonance increases as the degree of discrepancy among cognitions increases. Second, dissonance increases as the number of discrepant cognitions increases. Third, dissonance is inversely proportional to the number of consonant cognitions held by an individual. Fourth, the relative weights given to the consonant and dissonant cognitions may be adjusted by their importance in the mind of the individual.

If dissonance is experienced as an unpleasant drive state, the individual is motivated to reduce it. Now that the factors that affect the magnitude of this unpleasantness have been identified, it should be possible to predict what we can do to reduce it:

1. Changing Cognitions 
If two cognitions are discrepant, we can simply change one to make it consistent with the other. Or we can change each cognition in the direction of the other.

2. Adding Cognitions 
If two cognitions cause a certain magnitude of dissonance, that magnitude can be reduced by adding one or more consonant cognitions.

3. Altering importance
Since the discrepant and consonant cognitions must be weighed by importance, it may be advantageous to alter the importance of the various cognitions.


"There are no contradictions in reality, only confused facts and false premises." --William R. Lynne, Pentagon Aliens.

"You may either consider this as fiction, fact, or a mixture of fact and fiction. That decision is always up to the individual, for, to paraphrase Aristotle, we are never lied to; we must first lie to ourselves before we can accept a lie as the truth." --William R. Lynne, Pentagon Aliens.

"It is impossible to "believe" a lie. Why? Because, in order to "believe" something, one must have some "means by which they know it to be true". Since a lie is untrue, the means is non-existent, and what is purported to be the means, is first a lie to oneself, an agreement with the self to believe a lie." --William R. Lynne, Pentagon Aliens.

"How", you may ask, "...could the CIA (or its affiliates) plant ancient 'Vimana' material in ancient Hindu or Sanskrit manuscripts?" It should not amaze you to know that many of the 'interpreters' of such works were often East Indians with Oxford or Cambridge degrees, who worked with British intelligence and MI-5, and OSS in the WWII Asian Theater, and that intelligence agencies hire many such scholars and finance their work. Their interpretations are often a matter of ...interpretation." --William R. Lynne, Pentagon Aliens.

"The [OSI] dupes are usually chosen by personality profile, epistemology (must be Platonist), religiousity (also Platonist), as well as possibly neurological abnormalities such as certain sleep disorders, any or all of which may render them especially vulnerable to the 'manufacturing' process. p.17