Why The Future - Because Nostalgia

What are we working towards?

What is the vision we hold in our minds, that we are endeavoring to construct some material components of, in order to realize that vision in the physical now?

Am I nostalgic? Yes. Of course. I experienced the high life in an elevated as-yet-still Colonial and then yet again, privateer, corporate social milieu - and that was many decades ago.

I think this works as design - it's modern, slightly futuristic,
but it's also authentic as a reflection of what it's supposed to be.
And I do think it is 'luxury.'

Those parts of it that I have an affection for, were very good parts indeed. The only things I saw that were negative - for the most part - were the unbreakable (and insane, as far as I was concerned) intent that quite a lot of people had, to engage in political and financial corruption in order to 'get ahead;' but not just 'ahead' as in what the modern middle class does or attempts to do, but 'ahead in the upper echelons...' They wanted to have the titles, the social position, the reverence that a handful of others appeared to command. And I most certainly saw the poverty of the outre. 

There was ugliness - as there still is. But there was the simply glorious, too.

Today, for me, the thing which stands out the most about the 'glory,' is its authenticity. If you have a lot of money today, and you are from the recent decades, you may not even know, what authenticity is... You see you can't substitute a synthetic simulacrum for something that carries a name, and a description of what it is - or is meant to be - and a manifesto of what function it performs, simply because the modern volume demand means there is not enough of the real thing to go around: you can't use a substitute, and pay the price of the genuine article, and think you are experiencing the thing.

'White musk' - is fake, you see. It isn't 'musk' at all. It's a synthetic chemical molecule made in an industrial laboratory.

And why is that a bad thing? Well it isn't a bad thing - it's just not the thing; and also it can't do the same thing, that the original genuine article can.

The characteristics of life style, of living, in the world, is changing, and will continue to change, and at some point widely deliver an experience of human life, of human society, of modern life style to many people that is a direct reflection of technology and advancement.

And there will be plenty of people with lots of money who will only assume they are living the high life, and they will not be - but you might be (living a very high life)...

One simple case example is to do with modern fragrances, aftershaves, perfumes (and by extension flavorings in alcohol and wines and other food and beverages). You see, yes, the modern chemistry lab can render amazing molecules that mimic sensations and feelings and memories about places and things. But no, they are not the things themselves. And they are not because modern industrial chemistry has a long way to go to comprehend the mechanisms of sensation, and memory especially emotional memory, and the electromagnetic dynamic mechanisms of molecular communication systems. The revered perfume expert Luca Turin (worked for the US Military under a research grant at some point...) has the best grasp of what these mechanisms are, and he is just about the only individual whose work reaches the public; others are under wraps by big industry and the military.

'By the fireplace'

You'll be paying BIG money for a European brand name men's fragrance product - such as for instance something from Maison Margiela's 'Replica' line. I cannot even say that a large component of that price is going to marketing, because I don't think it is. Maison Margiela is a brand which produces fashion for women, some fashion for men, and only has the fragrance line 'on the side' even though it is regarded as a really important modern perfume and fragrance brand. But it's not their main thing.

So, you can have a bottle that literally does smell like 'by the fireplace,' or 'at the jazz club,' or 'at the barbers.' And very clever it is, what they do; no doubt about it at all.

And you will encounter many reviewers talk about these products the same way traditionally people did about complex perfumes and French Fashion/Designer House fragrances.

But they are not the same kinds of thing; these new things are molecular constructions that are simulations of something else. And so the experience you will have when wearing them, or using them, is different by great gulfs of sensation, when compared to the real thing.

But what is this 'real thing' you are speaking about, John?

And we'll talk about that side of it in more detail in the next article. 

Rusbridger And The Money Trail

As one of our readers pointed out via a linked article he posted in his comment (see 'Wreck Stuff' blog article here) - there is such a thing as 'over-fit' where people drawing conclusions from theories that could be seen as 'conspiracy theories,' needlessly include 'hot button' things extraneous to what is required to make the actual theory fit into the observed picture.

Over-fit can be misleading. And the fact of being misled at all could take you away from the critical, even the sometimes dangerous aspects.

I mean why do we talk about any of these kinds of political things at all, really? You know - why at all, anyway?

Well, it is because they have a crucial part to play in understanding what money is doing at any given geopolitical 'time.'

Can the price of gold rise? Can and will the price of silver rise? Can BitCoin rise more? What is the future of digital currencies? What about inflation or deflation? ...And so on.

Alan Rusbridger - the chief managing editor of The Guardian at the time Edward Snowden was leaving the West with his information, and Chelsea Manning handing over troves of material to Julian Assange - is a very sophisticated (and important) example of the strategic analysis dangers of 'over-fit' to any 'theory.'

Alan Rusbridger - when he was chief editor
at The Guardian

Rusbridger basically 'let Assange down.' He 'backed him in,' as far as to get Assange to work through The Guardian as the privileged mainstream conduit, and then dumped him when Rusbridger (along with some other big name media corporations) chose to bend to the conditions and controls of the US Intel agencies' panoply concerning the most significant Manning-origin data trove.

Now Rusbridger is one of the most intelligent people in the whole world today; no question. But he is conflicted by his elevated position, and his previous 'good relations' with the US Intel people and government. He has wealth and he has lifestyle and he has position. Everyone can have an ego and even if Alan Rusbridger would like to keep his own ego 'on balance' just how do you turn on your previous 'friends' let's call them, and say to everyone, well, those guys are criminals and cold-blooded murderers who acted with no legitimacy in certain cases...?

That kind of stand takes moral backbone which can see the peril of the likely consequences, and still stand up straight.

This is not 'conspiracy' - not any kind of dark conspiracy, which is needed to explain things: this is stock standard ordinary daily lifestyle impact decisions with a moral dimension.

Rusbridger would lose money, power, friends, reputation among the elite - in short, everything he was enjoying - for being a journalist who acted 'without fear or favor.'

Typical engineer's or consulting manager's conveyance...

In Australia, there are opaque rules called 'Journalist Information Warrants' which are roughly-speaking, similar to the US FISA Court warrants; except that these also empowered Federal Police to intimidate reporters, journalists, basically anyone who has any sensitive material that is regarded as 'to be kept secret' by government (and of course, which could or might damage the reputation and/or power of the government at that given time).

'The money trail' just leads to people who are in love with money. For me, because they are illegitimately using government mechanisms of power to suppress knowledge going to the public (at basic minimum) - it's not their money; it's yours.

Now... We can get money ourselves too, you know. If we knew what game others were playing at and that we needed to start 'playing against' them. Even though others are continuously seeking to have it all for themselves all the time.
  
Yeah... Why do I get the feeling things are about to change in ways the 'elite' and the mindless drones who have been propping them up all these decades, do not have the wit to perceive is coming down the pipeline?

URGENT KIM PHILBY

interq.ward1@gmail.com

Social Chain?

In one of this week's local newspapers, was an article about a large marketing company now with a 'digital space' division called 'Social Chain.'

I think I've mentioned this company before... briefly somewhere. And probably just tucked inside some other matters.

'Social Chain' maintains a network of online users, including so-called 'influencers,' with the object being that economic value is created by having hundreds or thousands of online people positively review something - creating the impression to innocent online readers or viewers that something, some product for instance, is very well liked and that there is a strong demand for it.

To me this seems more like fraud than 'marketing...' LOL

However, what is certainly true is that decent numbers give 'currency' to an online activity.

Here at this Blog our numbers have a good upward long term trend line in the data chart of visitors and readers and users.

If it hits a certain threshold now it will be able to generate commercial revenue here for doing nothing else than what it always 'merely' has. 

And so if you ever have the capacity to bring a few more readers and contributors into here, we managers here will be grateful and we'll all of us old-time readers of 'Old Money Savoir Faire' share the proceeds - I'll set up a utility token for us and thrust it into the 'BitCoin' space by making the token an 'AltCoin' exchangeable for ordinary currency and BitCoin and direct ALL of the Blog ad and other Blog-related revenue into the utility token.

...And then each of you could perhaps also earn yourself a paid fee for writing and contributing something to the Blog.

Best Wishes

John E. N. Ward
Blog Chief Editor and Site Senior Manager

Sinister And Occult And Deeply Dangerous

I've had to think very carefully about this article... I've had to think a lot about choosing words carefully.

Firstly because I certainly do not believe making sweeping generalizations are appropriate to expressing my own thoughts on the matter. Of course, I could, like anyone casually expressing a gut reaction or 'feeling' or superficial impression - make sweeping generalizations!

This is a 'two pipe problem,'
this one!

But I'm not going to.

But then I'm also a bit stuck too, because we are positioned in a world in which 'standard definitions' for words, and common beliefs about what some old writings say - are not the same as my own understandings concerning them. So I don't know, and I'm not sure whether readers here really share similar understandings.

For example... Every church in the whole entire world is convinced there is a word 'fornication' in the Bible, Old and New Testaments. I mean, yes, there is in most translations into English, however after all the thing was not originally composed in English and Hebrew was not a written language at the proposed or presumed time of Moses and indeed there were no modern grammatical forms of written Hebrew even at the time the original Septuagint was actually written down.

So... So... Where does that leave me...

Well... The original Greek word, and the proto-god-only-knows-what - Sumerian? Sanskrit? - or the primitive Aramaic word... ...is 'ekporneuo.' 'Ekporneuo' does not mean 'fornication' - in fact so much so were early translators aware that it does not, that they notated their simplistic truncated (though final textual) translations with the phrase: 'give themselves over to fornication...' So what we have is the translators really saying this tautology - 'fornication (being the word we settled on) means 'give oneself over to er, er... ...fornication.'

A meaningless exposition, frankly.

No. It does not mean 'fornication.'

Thus, according to me and pretty much no one else, even if there were 'Watchers' or 'Fallen Angels,' who 'fell' (there were not any of those things; not in the original texts, not in reality, not at any time in history ancient, deep past, or now, or ever) their problem was not that they 'committed fornication.' Their 'sin' (and again, there is no word 'sin' originally, and certainly not as is commonly understood today as a word cast about in every church).

If you want to see someone go into a supernatural trance,
have a look at Kristian Nairn's 'trance DJ set' on YouTube.
Nairn is the actor who plays 'Hodor' in GOT, and he's also a
very good DJ.  

No. They 'exceeded all satisfactions of greed and lust even to the point past barbaric vandalism (of course, 'vandalism' not a word at that time).' Ekporneuo. And that has a 'subtle' (not!) meaning beyond simple unlicensed sex.

There is no passage in the Bible in which Sodom and Gomorrah were obliterated because of gay sex or homosexuality. No indeed, for once again, it is for 'ekporneuo' - and in fact worse; they were about to violently rape certain unusual-looking strangers under the protection of Lot.

There are many words used by Jesus Christ which have all been translated as a bulk job lot as 'sin,' but they have very very complex and subtle nuances of meaning with very important implications: the words are 'be defeated,' 'not be ideal,' 'not perfectly beautiful,' 'sinister with cunning,' 'not in the divinely perfect way...'

But no single word 'sin.' Nowhere. Not ever. Ever. Period.

So which 'Jesus' are any of you listening to? The guy that fell down in the last shower of rain at a local church on your television? Or the guy who may have lived, might have lived, and according to some did not even live, albeit at least we can all agree - the actual chronologically original 'Jesus Christ?!' ...of the texts from more or less around that time in question?

So what then is the problem, if any, with transgender anything, or perhaps, with the present political agenda that I have termed it deep and dark and occult and utterly dangerous?

Well, I can tell you my own thoughts let's say, as pitched to maybe an actual transgender person - what does going too far mean to your mind, to your sensitivities about other human beings, about your friends and neighbors...? For all I know you might be some alien hybrid, or just plain alien (ET) who is legitimately needful of gender re-assignment surgical intervention. I don't know. And I don't care, since for one thing I am neither a medical doctor, nor a surgeon, nor any kind of professional psychologist; those guys form part of the fabric of ordinary society - I do not - and that's all of you guys' business, not mine. If they have some factual basis of reason to do something well, that's that as far as I'm concerned, and if they do not - then they go too far pretending to a knowledge and powers they do not have.

So here's another thing you will not read or hear anywhere else... I'm sure you have heard it said that somewhere in the Bible, someone said that 'the Seat of Satan is in Pergamon (Turkey).'

You've heard me say this before - the gods love puns and plays on words.

Okay so the people referred to in the infamous passages in the Book of Enoch and also in the mainstream canonical Bible were never called 'Watchers;' maybe they did do 'watching' but they were not specifically named 'Watchers.' They were described as, and named 'Gegenes.' You see there's 'homogenes,' and there's 'heterogenes,' and there's 'gegenes.'

A big tall individual - well over six foot tall.
I think by name 'Gena...?'

And the Gegenes were so terribly excessive in their strength, and in lusts and in their lack of compassion (mostly, not all of them) that they were able to do whatever they wanted, and they were eventually cannibals, and highly destructive of animals and men and even forests and trees (so the story goes). And when they died out (don't worry for what reason) some occultists were able to invoke their deceased spirits and have them in-dwell living people bred to accommodate their power (nephesh-philim: 'Nephilim') and so they were great warriors, great athletes, great 'beings' and did all kinds of extravagant things.

If you mess around using certain highly toxic drugs (and of course the US Military research units are already a long way up this road), you can fiddle with the Sella Turcica (Turkish Seat) which ensconces and usually circumscribes how much endocrine activity and flow can come from the pituitary, and you can 'create' gigantism or acromegaly and those subjects will start to have extended ranges of vision ('see' things which do not appear there to the rest of us), off-the-scale rage and anger potential, and immense strength and stamina and the ability to withstand pain.

There are plenty of 'gentle giants' around and there always have been. And there are even these 'gegenes' who will do you no harm.

Those are not the guys we are worried about. The guys I'm worried about are the 'poniria' - the ones who are sinisterly cunning. And the ones that are incredibly organised.