GOOD AND EVIL NEEDS TO BE REDEFINED

Disagreeing with popular opinions is not a valid definition of Satanism

I’ve been thinking a lot lately about Good and Evil. Seems like whatever it is we believe to be true is the Good and couldn’t be better. What those who disagree with us believe is Evil and getting worse. Were we always this intolerant, this infantile, this uncompromising? Are we really incapable of growth, of compassion, of thought beyond emotion? Of at least trying to understand the perspective of others outside ourselves and our own small group? Must people always depend on their inner nazi to do their thinking for them? No wonder I’m so depressed. And even more importantly, have we lost the capacity to recognize true evil when it plants itself right in the middle of our government.

I’ve also been thinking a lot lately about God and the Bible and Zechariah Sitchin and how this duality seems to be constantly repeated. Are we possibly living in Sartre’s idea of Hell? If you go with the premise that we are a species created originally to be slaves for an alien race of giants, we can see the dichotomy immediately between Enlil the authoritarian and Enki the creator. Enlil held the dominant position simply because of his birth although he was not Enki’s equal in either intelligence or character. But Enlil has become the model for the god worshipped by the three major religions, all of whom hate each other and see one’s own take on authoritarian idolatry as the correct and true one.

Meanwhile, Enki the Serpent King, the one who, along with his sister Ninhursag, created humans from the DNA of a primitive earthling and the extraterrestrials, and then in addition saved them from the extinction planned for them by Enlil. Enki attempted to instill in them the attributes of wisdom and compassion, but was transpecied into Satan, the ultimate evildoer. Strange then, isn’t it, that he’s also named Lucifer, the bringer of light and his planet is the morning star, the planet of love, Venus. So, needless to say, who does the fledgling humans choose to worship but the irrational and authoritarian Enlil, rejecting their genuine creator as the apotheosis of all evil. It feels like this has been the pattern followed by the human race ever since, unable to differentiate the bad from the good and inevitably supporting evil at the expense of the good and tragically at our own expense and at the expense of every living thing on our Mother Earth including the soil itself.

I am pretty certain I am ignorant of way more than half the number of times the human race has been engaged in similar dichotomies. I’d like to believe that occasionally humans have made the right choice, that once in awhile they have recognized the real satan-of-the-moment and rejected him/her, I just don’t recollect any instances in which this happened.

The Catholic Church, when it had the power, slaughtered so many women healers as witches that in some towns, there were no women left. I call it the first Dark Age. In this, the second we are simply erasing women, I suspect with the ultimate goal of finding a way to create soul-less semi-humans in a lab, all male and eliminating women altogether. The psychopaths who seek to be gods this time have no comprehension of the function of women in the world. The majority of us can’t fight, aren’t as strong as they and symbolize everything they disdain: consensus thinking, a desire for peace, compassion and then there’s the ability to create new life. Their patriarchic guidebook tells them an authoritarian god is the creator of all life and women were created as an afterthought and companion to the “important” sex - theirs. To believe otherwise is not just wrong, it’s evil - or as one of our current words for evil has it, transphobic.

In the 19th century we had the Germ Theory vs. Terrain Theory controversy: Pasteur vs. Bechamp. Pasteur was apparently the Fauci of his day, good at politics, bad at science and Bechamp the reverse. So now Pasteur has become our Science God, Bechamp long forgotten. We absolutely and fully believe in and place our faith in the Theory of Germs.

Theory is such an interesting word. Among several definitions provided by the dictionary are: an unproved assumption, conjecture, speculation. In other words, something not (yet) proven to be true. Except, apparently when it comes to Germ Theory. We don’t even need the research since basing an entire health care system on this guess is extraordinarily profitable. Completely unlike when it’s combined with the word conspiracy when it takes on the meaning of “you are completely and irreversibly insane”. Makes sense when you consider that no two people have ever, in all of human history, conspired to create a circumstance favorable to themselves at the expense of others. So now we have the religion of Faith-Based Science, but still with an allegiance to Enlil ideology.

We also had the sad story of Ancel Keys vs. John Yudkin. Ancel Keys, with funding, it is said, from the sugar industry, managed to come up with extensive research indicting fat for sugar’s crimes. Following the show trial held in the U.S. Senate, then Senator McGovern declared that the American diet needed to be changed and it was way too important to worry about a little thing like evidence. Or results. It needed to happen instantly. So whoever it was who said that this change would cause an epidemic of obesity and diabetes proved to be either a prophet or an actual honest-to-enki scientist. But of course the majority went with the side that sought to harm them for profit.

I recently read about the Dunning-Kruger Syndrome. Apparently Dunning, a psychologist, had read an article about a man who held up two banks without trying to disguise himself in any way. Of course the police were able to identify him from the bank cameras and went to his home to arrest him. He was very surprised to see them and assured them that he had applied lemon juice to his entire face and so should have been invisible to them. So Dunning, along with Kruger, his assistant, undertook a study in which it was determined that the more ignorant people were the more confident they were that they were right. And the reverse was also true, those who were more intelligent were far more likely to second guess themselves. This would mean that ignorant people are more likely to speak authoritatively and other ignorant people were more likely to heed their advice because of it.

Then getting us to vaxx/anti-vaxx in which people enthusiastically welcome injections of who-knows-what in which they are being used as human guinea pigs since it has 1. Very limited research 2. No knowledge of long-term side effects. 3. A change in the definition of “vaccine” in order to qualify as one 4. No culpability on the part of those administering the shots and 5. More people injured by the shot than from the reason to take it. And still, those refusing the shot are considered selfish and uncaring demons, unconcerned about the public good.

Now we have Ukraine, the good vs. Russia, the evil; Israel the good vs. Palestine the evil - or is that vice versa? It’s hard to keep up. We also have the U.S. the good vs. Saddam Hussein the evil, U.S the good vs. Afghanistan the evil, U.S. good vs. Gadaffi the evil, U.S. good vs. Assad the evil, U.S. good vs. Iran the evil, China the (almost) evil. In fact, anyone who disagrees with U.S. hegemony is evil and too many of us buy into it each and every time the same play, different cast is played for us.

I have, sadly, seen the same behavior exhibited toward truth tellers. Julian Assange has, to my knowledge, never been in the U.S., is certainly not a citizen and does not owe the U.S. his allegiance. And yet the U.S. government has bent over backwards to silence him and to punish him for speaking the truth about the criminality of the U.S. government. Same with all the doctors, scientists and researchers who have tried to warn us about the toxicity of the latest fake vaccine for a fake disease. They must be silenced while the public foams at the mouth and calls for their disembowelment for daring to have an opinion that differs from the official propaganda. And Assange? He’s nothing but a terrorist fomenting evil by exposing the criminality of our government.

And of course there’s always the evil Putin to hate, that dictator who presides over a country that has the universal health care our country lacks, who does not use the Russian population as a toxic waste dump for fluoride, known to cause passivity and a lowering of IQ among other side effects. It was used by the nazis in their concentration camps to help keep their victims passive. And started being used as well in the U.S. in the 1940’s but very few countries outside of the U.S. and I believe New Zealand toxify their water with fluoride. Putin also banned the use of gmo plants in Russia, but there are also a number of other countries who also do this. The United States is not among them. Why? Because the U.S. bans nothing that can bring profits to obscenely rich psychopaths. And if you disagree, the billionaire-owned MSM will assure you that such dissidents are evil.

The support that is offered to these psychopaths by too many Americans feels like we are engaged in a never ending Punch and Judy show with the Judy character changing frequently to accommodate for America’s enemy du jour.

While I have no real knowledge of how we came to be, I don’t believe anyone else does either. So we make up stories, either invented or invented for us of what makes sense to us. That seems to be one of the functions of both science and religion. Having read a number of books on the subject, being created as a slave species by a group of technologically advanced extraterrestrials who become our “god(s)” makes most sense to me. So I can’t help but wonder, are we doomed by our DNA to repeatedly choose the wrong path? It’s even more incomprehensible to me how so many claim to be able to define a “spectrum” from a very clearly biologically defined binary sexuality. And still are unable to comprehend the spectrum on the scale between good and evil and the presence of both in us all. Or why having an opinion that differs from the propagandized consensus means that you should be banned, expelled, cancelled, silenced, fired and or stoned. Unless of course your non-consensus opinion concerns the slaughter of massive number of people, including children with either harmful so-called medicines or harmful so-called foods.

Our newest target seems to be the 95% of the human race who is not now and has not been for the past 300 million or so years, a vegan. Meat eaters have been added as the new devils-du-jour. Selfish and unconcerned about the environment. Why does that reasoning seem so backward to me? The harming of the human race to purportedly benefit the environment. Is that what it takes? Kissinger is known to have said “Control the food, you control the people”. They succeeded at that with the Plains Indians - slaughtered 10 million buffalo in 20 years, then “herded” the defeated Plains Indians into smart cities - or was it reservations or am I just confused about what the difference is - if there is any. Within one generation they went from their designation as the tallest people on the entire planet to have shrunk 2 inches and on their way to lifetime illness and obesity.

So I’m left to ponder, as much as we are encouraged to believe that evil is good and good evil, should we really be worshipping Satan? I hear that’s the true religion of our fearless leaders and look how well it seems to pay off for them. Except that our leaders are people I would mostly describe as evil and conscienceless. I don’t really want to worship their gods. But what if who we have been indoctrinated into believing was god was actually the devil - definitely sounds like something the devil would do and Enki, the serpent king, the one who sought to make us wise (and failed spectacularly) was the first of many to be maligned in the interests of those who are busy harming us, physically, psychologically and spiritually.

How do you look at others who may have opinions different than your own, or a skin color or ethnicity or belief system which you don’t share and fail to see their humanity? When did we learn to hate and reject those who disagree with us. When did we learn to stop learning? To respond with anger at those with the audacity to disagree with our perfect opinions? How does it benefit us?

I might just start worshipping the morning star. If only I could bring myself to get up that early.