The summer holidays are over. The war that Russia wages against NATO in Ukraine shows no signs of coming to an end; Europeans are facing ever-increasing energy prices that threaten to either push them on the brink of starvation, poverty, and unemployment or make them take to the streets and overthrow their governments; the new British government has been formed in which the key positions have been assigned to non-Whites; Queen Elizabeth II has died, a monarch who ruled the United Kingdom for seventy years, a symbol of tradition, honour, duty, Christian faith and patriotism.

In ancient Rome augurs would either cut the entrails of animals out or let birds fly in the hope of uncovering signs predicting the future. We may laugh at those practices and yet. And yet there are signs that portend events. When Pope Benedict XVI resigned, a huge flash of lightning hit the top of the dome of St Peter’s Basilica. It was captured on film. Clearly, the Catholic Church under its successor Pope Francis is becoming increasingly different with emphasis being put on ecology, immigrants and of all the religious things on Pachamama! What is the United Kingdom going to look like under Charles the III? He, too, is obsessed with ecology and climate change. What will the Old Continent look like? What does future hold forth when it comes to the Western world?

The Western world, which is hellbent on weakening and subjugating Russia and China; the Western world, which is hellbent on having its population replaced; the Western world, which has very porous borders and simultaneously fears far-off aggressors; the Western world, which is infiltrated by foreigners day in, day out, and simultaneously claims to be afraid of North Korea or Iran… These are some of the legitimate questions one needs to ask, one wants to know answers to. Does the death of the queen mark an epochal change?

Yugoslavia with its few nations each of which enjoyed a measure of autonomy was held together so long as Marshal Josip Bros Tito was alive. It took very few years after his death for Yugoslavia to disintegrate. The United Kingdom is also made up of autonomous regions – England, Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland – with separatist tendencies. The deaths of the general secretaries of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union – Brezhnev, Andropov and Chernenko, who acted as real rulers of the USSR – also heralded the end of an epoch. The British people of all political persuasions may have felt loyalty to the monarch who embodied the best in their culture and tradition: will they want to pledge allegiance to Kwasi Kwarteng, the new chancellor of the exchequer, James Cleverly, the new foreign secretary, and Suella Braverman, the new home secretary? 

 

If you are confused in these difficult times, if you no longer know what and whom to believe in, then numerous, modern gurus come to your aid. One of them is the Great Master of the Grand Orient, Professor of Philosophy Giuliano di Bernardo. It is one of those people who, like Klaus Schwab, Bill Gates, Greta Thunberg or Yuval Noah Harari, already know our future and have ready-made solutions for all of humanity’s problems.

The public became aware of the professor from Trent during the pandemic period when he said: “Pandemics will be the rule and not the exception; they must be controlled without democracy, which is a system full of weaknesses. The whole world will have to be ruled by “a god” who can do everything, like the president of China. To create the new man, embryonic cells will have to be used, and Catholics will have to accept this (…) and transhumanism cannot be controlled with the consent of the masses.”¹

Freemasonry is a mixture of occult philosophy, hermeticism, Christian Kabbalah, magic, alchemy, ideas of the Rosicrucians and as such does not seem to fit into the modern world. Freemasons consistently develop their ideas in their think tanks and to them belong and have belonged the most powerful of this world: kings and nobles, presidents and politicians, writers and artists, scientists and charlatans. Continue reading →

The summit between Russian President Vladimir Putin, Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan that took place in Tehran on 19th July is reminiscent of the meeting that took place in the same venue in 1943 between British Prime Minister Winston Churchill, American President Franklin Delano Roosevelt and the Soviet Union’s leader Joseph Stalin. The similarities extend not only to the place but also to other circumstances. The nations represented by the three leaders of 1943 were in a state of war; the same applies to the three nations whose representatives gathered in Tehran of 2022. Seventy-nine years ago the United Kingdom, the United States and the Soviet Union were engaged in hostilities against Germany, and – in the case of the United States and partly the United Kingdom – against Japan.

Today Russia is in deep conflict with the collective West through the war by proxy in Ukraine, Iran has been a besieged state – i.e. suffering from a variety of Western sanctions – for more than forty years while Turkey – though formally the West’s ally and a member of NATO – is straddling the West-East political divide, increasingly flirting with Moscow, especially since the failed coup d’état carried out by (pro-)Western powers against Recep Erdoğan.

Yes, there are issues that threaten to break up the political unity formed between Ankara, Tehran and Moscow – with Syria and the Turkish provision of Bayraktar drones to Ukraine coming at the top of the list of divergences – yet, the factors that glue the alliance emerge equally powerful. Now wonder that at more or less the same time the American president visited Israel and Saudi Arabia, as if consolidating these three nations against the aforementioned triangle. Continue reading →

Information is a commercial item or – to say it better – it is an inexhaustible series of items. We, humans, need to know about what is happening so as to be able to run our business or simply to slake our curiosity. Information needs to be accurate and unbiased; it needs to be collected and forwarded. No one person can do it on his own. First newspapers maintained a number of correspondents here and there. No single newspaper was rich enough to have correspondents in all the interesting places in the world. They began exchanging information and paying for it. Ultimately it was the collective customer – the reader – who paid the price. At a time in the past someone had a brilliant idea (and had sufficient resources) to establish a news agency for the purpose of solely gathering information and selling it to news outlets. It worked.

News agencies have become numerous around the globe, but the most important include Agence France Presse, the Associated Press and Reuters. They all claim to be providers of objective, unbiased information, but that certainly is not the case; but first things first.

An agency needs to have a correspondent or an office somewhere in the world, someone who collects information and relays it to the agency. A correspondent works on the spot, makes contact with people important locally or witnesses to events in person (he needs someone to notify him of unfolding events), speaks the local language as he has learnt it or relies on interpreters, which in either case is a barrier to overcome; most importantly, a correspondent has his own political, moral and philosophical stance through which he filters the information that is fed to him; a correspondent is employed by an agency precisely because his views overlap with those of the agency’s bosses! The filter is then doubly strong. Continue reading →