The Falsification of History: Our Distorted Reality (123 page)

All four forces are just different aspects of the same process, operating at different levels in our society.
 
There is really only one force preventing the public availability of free energy technology, and that is the non-spiritually motivations of we humans, but in the final analysis, free energy technology is an outward manifestation of divine abundance.
 
It is the engine of the economy of an enlightened society, where people voluntarily behave in a respectful and civil manner toward each other, where each member of society has everything they need and does not covet his neighbour’s possessions, where war and physical violence has become socially unacceptable behaviour and people's differences are at least tolerated, if not enjoyed.

The appearance of free energy technology in the public domain represents the dawning of a truly civilised age.
 
It is an epochal event in human history and no one individual can take credit for it. No-one can become rich on it, no-one can rule the world with it, it is simply a gift from the ‘gods’. It forces us all to take responsibility for our own actions and for our own self-discipline and self-restraint when needed.
 
The world as it is currently ordered cannot have free energy technology without being totally transformed by it into something else and this civilisation, imperfect though it undoubtedly is, has reached the pinnacle of its development because it has birthed the seeds of its own transformation.
 
Un-spiritualised humans cannot be trusted with free energy, they will only do what they have always done, which is to take merciless advantage of each other or kill each other and themselves in the process.

Upon reading Ayn Rand's work, ‘Atlas Shrugged’ or the Club of Rome Report, it becomes obvious that the Elite families have understood this for decades.
 
Their plan is to live in a world of free energy, but permanently freeze-out everyone else.
 
However this is not new, for example, royalty has always considered the general population to be its subjects.
 
However, what is new is that we can communicate with each other now better than at any time in the past.
 
The Internet offers us all an opportunity to overcome the combined efforts of the other three forces preventing free energy technology from spreading.

“Our current system of drugs-and-surgery conventional medicine will bankrupt any state or nation foolish enough to depend on it.
 
No nation that bets its future on pharmaceuticals and chemotherapy is going to win that bet.
 
They will all collapse in the end because you can’t create a healthy nation by drugging your population into a state of health.
 
As long as Big Pharma dominates health care and it currently runs the medical journals, medical schools, hospitals, and even the FDA so you will never have a health care system that has any interest whatsoever in teaching people how to be healthy.
 
When profits come from sickness, the corporations always find new ways to keep people sick.”
 
Mike Adams

Medical fascism is undoubtedly with us and has permeated our entire mainstream health regime.

Probably one of the most callous and insidious ways by which we are being covertly attacked as a species is not only via the food we eat, but also through our totally corrupt healthcare system which has been infiltrated and is largely controlled by ‘Big Pharma’ the large pharmaceutical cartels and to a lesser but nevertheless significant extent, ‘Big Food’ the giant food conglomerates.

To say that our healthcare system has failed us in the past, continues to fail us in the present and is constantly being manipulated to fail us in the future, is a contender for understatement of the millennium.
 
Make no mistake about it, general human health is not improving one iota, despite the so-called ‘medical advances’ of the last century or more.
 
It is an undisputable fact that the incidence of all the newer, major destructive diseases is increasing exponentially as time goes by, despite the near-eradication of certain formerly ‘killer’ diseases.
 

Fifty years ago, one person in 50 would have been expected to contract cancer during their lifetimes and now that situation has deteriorated to the point where we are lucky if it is as low as 1 in 3 and decreasing yearly.
 
This is also true of many diseases such as Diabetes types 1 and 2, Alzheimer’s, Multiple Sclerosis, AIDS / HIV and the many invented ‘mental’ syndromes that have only been prevalent for a decade or so, ADHD, Bipolar Disorder and the like.

Why should this be?
 
Does anyone ever really try to answer that question?
 
I believe that this question is side-stepped and avoided at all costs by the Elite-run medical establishment because they know the answer to the question already, but would very much rather that you did not, if at all possible.

For example, consider this for a moment; a typical medical doctorate takes about 4 to 6 years of study to achieve, depending on the exact course undertaken, at any Western medical education establishment or University.
 
One would naturally expect that any education or teaching programme about the workings of the human body should include a rather finely detailed study of human nutrition, its effects on all the bodily organs and functions and how to help prevent disease and other ailments by way of a balanced diet and vitamin consumption.
 
Is it not more than a little strange then that our standard medical education does not include one single lecture in six whole years of study, on the subject of nutrition or disease prevention?

‘Surely not’, you may say.
 
‘How can that be possible?’
 
I was absolutely stunned when I first investigated this issue myself and actually made a spurious visit to my GP (General Medical Practitioner) just to find an excuse to ask him the question myself.
 

‘Can you recommend any good nutrition programmes that will help me recover from the bad bout of general tiredness and lethargy I have been experiencing?’
 
I asked him.
 
His reply did not surprise me knowing what I now know about the issue.
 
Without embarrassment or even hesitation, he actually replied that nutrition was not the answer.
 
He mumbled something along the lines of as long as my diet was reasonably OK then it is not a problem.
 
Instead he began without asking whether or not I wanted it, to write out a prescription for some drug or other, which I politely declined.
 
‘It’s quite harmless’ he said and ‘it will make you feel better and more energetic’.
 
After again declining his kind offer, I then asked why he did not believe that good healthy natural nutrition was the answer.
 
Again without any embarrassment he simply stated that nutrition was not an area of his expertise and therefore he could not suggest anything to help.
 
I thanked him and left (without the prescription).

Do you not find it absolutely amazing that someone who is paid a very substantial salary from the public purse to look after human healthcare, firstly did not know or understand anything about the effect that good or bad nutrition has on our bodies and secondly was prepared to ‘push’ a pharmaceutical drug on to me without a second thought or to consider the implications of introducing an unnatural, artificial substance into my body?
 
He knew nothing of course about nutrition and so was unable to help in that respect, but the question remains, how much does he really know about that drug other than what the local pharmaceutical rep had told him or what the accompanying leaflet or DVD had said and how reliable is that information likely to be?
 
‘Not very’, is the answer to both questions I strongly suspect.

I also strongly believe that we are conditioned and encouraged to pay a visit to our doctor for the slightest ailment to which we are subjected.
 
An itch on your leg?
 
Go to the doctor, he or she will give you some patented product or other to ‘cure’ it.
 
Severe headache?
 
Go today and get some industrial-strength painkillers.
 

I am sure you get the picture.
 
However, I am absolutely convinced that this is a huge mistake.
 
Our bodies possess a remarkable ability to heal themselves given a little time and encouragement and many small (or even large in some cases) ailments can be ‘cured’ by allowing the body a little breathing space to work its own magic.
 
The problem is that once we embark on a course of pharmaceutical treatment, this then interferes with and interrupts our bodies own natural curative abilities, prolonging and even exacerbating the issue.
 
This of course is exactly what Big Pharma wants, because their profits are greatly enhanced by this state of affairs.
 
Instead of allowing ailments to be naturally soothed away, how much better for their ‘bottom-line’, that we undertake a course of treatment which will in many cases make the problem worse and require further drugs to counteract the sometimes catastrophic side effects of the first one and so it goes on.

There has recently been much new independent research into the efficacy of pharmaceuticals in general, leading to the inescapable conclusion that most of them work only in the same way as do placebos and that is because the recipient actually expects them to work and not because they have any beneficial chemical effect on the body.
 
For example, when controlled test subjects were told that they were not receiving pain-killing medication, even though they were, the medication proved to be completely ineffective.

In other words it is the mind of the patient that controls the effectiveness of the treatment and not the medication itself.
 

“These findings call into question the scientific validity of many trials.
 
It completely blows cold randomised clinical trials, which don't take into account expectation."
 
George Lewith, Professor of Health Research, University of Southampton, 2011

“But it all brings up a question: If many pharmaceuticals only work because the mind makes them real, then why do some drugs appear to out-perform placebos in clinical trials?

The answer to that will probably surprise you: It's because when people are in randomized, placebo-controlled studies, they're usually hoping to get the real drugs, not the placebo.
 
And how do they determine whether they're getting the ‘real’ drugs?
 
By the presence of negative side effects!
 
As those side effects begin to appear - constipation, sexual disorders, nausea, headaches, etc - then those participants convince themselves that they received the ‘real’ drugs!
 
And from that point, their mind makes it real!
 
So the blood pressure actually then starts to go down, or their cholesterol numbers drop, and so on.

The patients make real whatever expectation they were given when they were recruited for the drug trial in the first place.
 
Even the act of recruiting people for drug trials sets an expectation in their minds.
 
Patients, after all, are recruited for a ‘cancer drug trial’ or a ‘blood pressure drug trial’ or some other trial in which the expected outcome is made evident during the recruitment phase.”
 
Mike Adams, Natural News, 22nd February 2011

Please indulge me once again whilst I relate another story from my own experience.
  
In 1999 and before my subsequent research led me to become aware of what was really happening in the world today, I was diagnosed with Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia (BPH) commonly known as a swelling of the prostate gland and very common in males over the age of 40.
 
The main symptoms were an increased frequency plus a greater urgency in passing urine and a severely reduced ability to ‘shut off the flow’ as it were.
 
For those of you who have not experienced this condition personally or are of the female persuasion, I will describe its effects.
 
Although not at all painful, it is extremely disruptive to one’s life due to the need to be a maximum of 30 seconds from a toilet and even worse, being awoken five or six times each night with the urge to ‘go’.
 
This has a quite a serious effect on both one’s physical and mental welfare due to lack of sleep and frustration at being unable to live life fully.

So, to begin the story, I visited my local doctor’s surgery in early 1999 and after a short examination, he diagnosed the problem as BPH.
 
He prescribed a drug to cure the problem, but after several weeks it became obvious that the problem was getting worse not better.
 
His response to this was to increase the dosage and this he did progressively until the manufacturer’s ‘maximum recommended dosage’ figure was reached about six months later.
 
By this time, I was in a bad state both physically and psychologically, my life quality had markedly deteriorated due to problems with my job (it is virtually impossible to hold down a job in this condition) and this had a knock-on effect on my family and thus my general mental state.
 
In short, I was desperate.
  
About six months later still, in the midst of my despair and searching for possible solutions on the Internet, I came across a ‘natural health’ website that was to change my life.
 
I now know that it is just one of many thousands on similar themes, but at the time it was truly ‘ground-breaking’ for me.
 

To cut this long story short, I decided that I would visit my doctor again and ask him to wean me off the drug I was on.
 
How much worse could things be, I reasoned with myself.
 
Of course, he was not happy with this idea.
 
I suppose when you are conditioned all your life to believe that the whole premise upon which your career is built, that pharmaceutical cures are the only answer to health problems; then understanding that there is sometimes possibly a different, better way is not going to be easy to even consider as a possibility, let alone accept.
 
At first he tried to talk me out of it and gave me plenty of ‘reasons’ why I should stay on the drugs, but I persisted and he reluctantly agreed.
 
And so, in the space of the next three months I was drug-free.

The one thing I noticed immediately was that reducing the drug dosage made absolutely no difference.
 
In other words, the condition was just as bad on 50% or 25% of the original dose as it was on 100%.
 
Then, once I was free of the drug, very, very slowly at first I began to notice that I was a little better.
 
Within another six months I was back to normal and my life had improved immensely.
 
Even now, more than a decade later, I am convinced that had I just waited a couple of weeks or even a month or two, then my problem would have cured itself naturally without fuss.
 
Once I started on the course of drugs, did they contribute to prolonging the problem by confusing and obstructing my body’s natural defences?
 
We will never know conclusively, but one thing is for sure, when I was taking them, they certainly did not help the situation one jot.
 
I have never been back to the doctor (any doctor) for any form of treatment since that time and he certainly did not contact me to see how my condition was progressing without the drugs.