Conspiracy



Whatever is theoretical might be plausible, but obviously not factual until proven so through practical application.
A conspiracy theory therefore is an alleged plot that hasn't been proved to be true.
The New World Order, for example, is held as a conspiracy theory.
The term 'new world order' is by no means new. It has been use quite often, also in the course of history, especially following world wars. Today, although it might be used too freely, there are nevertheless facts that could support it.

Two of the official reasons for allowing thousands of migrants into Europe are, to give a boost to industry by way of cheaper labour, and to assure future populations by compensating for an alleged slump in European procreation. The first reason is passable although it suggests politically correct slavery. The second reason is more disturbingly ideologic. It reveals the intention of irresponsibly meddling with nature, society, root identities, diverse European cultures and values.

Immigration has been concerted and orchestrated, in as much as chosen continents (Canada with the USA, Australia and Europe) have opened their borders to an important, quasi uncontrolled influx of migrants. In consideration of the facts that most of the migrants are Muslim males, and not necessarily war-torn Syrian refugees, and that since their arrival there are too many negative reports regarding their behaviour, it's natural to conclude that in a subversive, diktat way, some sort of moronic project is being imposed upon established democracies.

The way Obama has been promoting Islam, demeaning the US founding fathers' root religion, and even the American flag, pushing for no borders internationally, and trying with all means and money (supplied generously by George Soros) to get H. Clinton elected in order to continue his 'legacy', spells it out even more clearly.
Viktor Orbán, the Hungarian Prime Minister, has expressed his concern publicly, referring to Soros and the inane project, catagorically refusing to allow additional immigration into Hungary.
Russia also makes open references, and one reads that Soros and the Rothschilds are banned from entering Russia. Some reports claim that Russia has even issued international arrest warrants for them.

But what would even a megalomaniac gain by such an absurd, culturally destructive project? In any case most of the so called 'elite' are too old to benefit from whatever 'power' could eventually, theoretically, but dubiously be within their grasp. Rothschild might want to add the last two or three banks to fulfil his absolutist international bank monopoly, like a child who obsessively wants the missing Pokemon to complete the collection, but Soros..?
Obviously no one could be that brainless and ill-inspired to imagine that the islamisation of the entire world under one totalitarian governing system, with the conform, cultureless, regressive, destructive, dystopian consequences, would positively further the cause of humanity.

However, it is nonetheless apparent that there is a treacherous scheme being perpetrated and imposed on democratic continents with the full complicity of their authorities. This has already caused Brexit, and certainly helped to elect Trump as US President. Needless to say, what is taking place is factual.

As the consequences of such an inanity can only be negative, one concludes that those responsable have negative intentions. Before they ultimately join Lucifer, it seems that they want to leave their mark by kicking the anthills and clouting the hornets' nests of modern civilisation. They want to create chaos, division, war and despair. Isn't this why Soros generously financed BLM, the organisation incredibly praised by Obama for doing such a 'fine job', of what? Of killing the police? In these regards Obama and H. Clinton seem to have shown themselves to be the stooges of Soros.

Another cynical pleasantry is that Soros is supposed to be a philanthropist. If this were so could he not spend some of his billions in trying to get Assad to step down? Could he not try stop the Syrian civil war, instead of shamefully exploiting it? Could he not afford to finance a massive safe zone refugee camp somewhere north of the Euphrates, instead of encouraging Muslims from all over the world to invade democracies? Should he not refrain from trying to persuade us that Russia is our enemy?

Admitting then that the theory of the New World Order/disorder brought about by global Islamisation is so devoid of sense that it would only be plausible as a theme for a Spielberg film; what does seem to be blatant conspiracy in trying to incite riots, chaos, division, racism, anarchy, cultural destruction, murder, maybe even civil war, if not world war, cannot so easily be dismissed.
__

Text and image rendering © Mirino. November, 2016 
 

Reassurance



When I took these pictures last month, naturally I felt the elation I always feel at such times. Beauty always reassures. Yet I didn't then feel any inclination to try to write something for Viewfinder to accompany a selection.


However, reassurance comes just as naturally as when one sometimes has the good fortune of seeing such splendid sights.


Regardless of self-professed Gods who believe they have divine rights to impose myopic visions and global experiments. Regardless of anyone who casually decrees the deprivation of rights to unborn human life. Regardless of those who kill, torture and rape, claiming they have the approval of God to do so.


Regardless of all this madness; what one has faith in, which naturally englobes the beauty of our surroundings, and above all the miracle of life itself, finally prevails, and always reassures.


For many people this is now far less apparent. Perhaps to them everything seems worse than ever. The results of the American Presidential elections were obviously not as they were programmed to be. There is a feeling of hopeless disorientation. The established system, the inane, elistist projects have been rejected.


Yet didn't they deserve to be? No one can abuse others indefinitely, or impose on the natural order of things with impunity.
The world is still turning beautifully, and there is always a reason for everything.


 Text and images © Mirino. 9th November, 2016

Pouvoir



Bien des années auparavant, le petit mot 'media' suscitait un sentiment plutôt positif, car on le voyait comme une grande fenêtre qui donnait sur le monde entier. Il représentait donc de l'espoir. Naïvement on croyait que la vérité l'emporterait toujours, car grâce à l'accès énorme d'informations, rien ne pouvait nous échapper ou être caché indéfiniment.

Néanmoins, se référant encore aux pensées d'Oscar Wilde dans son 'The Soul of Man under Socialism' (l'âme de l'homme sous le socialisme) il fait référence à Burke à l'égard du journalisme. Apparemment Burke traitait le journalisme comme 'le quatrième Etat'.
Wilde alors avance dans sa thèse que l'observation de Burke fut peut-être exacte à son époque, mais depuis, et au moment où Wilde écrivait, selon lui le journalisme était devenu le seul Etat, ayant mangé les trois autres.

Déjà vers la fin du 19° siècle donc, Wilde discernait ce pouvoir journalistique comme hors de proportion. Aucun besoin de se rappeler alors que la TV n'existait pas, ni Internet, ni smartphones, etc. Il n'y avait pas constamment des sondages montés pour obtenir un résultat prédéterminé non plus. Et évidemment le téléphone alors n'était pas encore au point.
Le pouvoir des media aujourd'hui est donc astronomiquement plus élevé et assez abusif. Tout dépend sur ce que l'on appelle 'politiquement correct', ou ce que les média courants devraient promouvoir comme manière acceptée de voir, de penser et d'interpréter les choses. Pour y arriver on dirait que quasi tout est permis.

Aujourd'hui cet abus est une insulte perpétuelle à l'intelligence de la plupart des gens. Afin que les 'élites' puissent poursuivre un projet fou et irresponsable sur lequel dépend aussi l'immigration incontrôlée, on se borne à trouver des excuses pour la nette hausse de criminalité. Un migrant Musulman coupable d'avoir violé une femme ou un enfant, par exemple, serait signalé préférablement d'abord comme européen, (canadien, australien ou américain). Si ce n'est pas possible même sous une identité de double nationalité, alors le criminel serait présenté comme un individu handicapé par des problèmes mentaux, etc.

A l'égard des politiques, on utilise les mêmes tactiques. Les media ont pu démontrer leur pouvoir en fabricant et en lançant F. Hollande, par exemple. La France a payé très cher le prix de cette lubie mal inspirée. En même temps que Hollande était haussé aux nues, son prédécesseur était systématiquement miné par certains média. Et aujourd'hui on attend un petit peu en surveillant le terrain avant de continuer le jeu de plus belle.

Aux Etats Unis l'argent voltige partout. Même un débat entre des candidats présidentiels a été truqué, car une chaîne comme CNN aurait sa préférence politique en fonction de ses intérêts. Intérêts toujours à court terme, comme une carotte dont l'intérieur est pourri, pendue devant l'âne.

Aujourd'hui, le candidat des présidentielles promu par les media français, celui qui incarne au mieux la médiocrité tant préféré par ces derniers, est Juppé. C'est programmé, tout comme l'élection de F. Hollande l'a été.
N. Sarkozy, clairement le genre de personnage que la France a besoin pour la sortir de la boue infecte socialiste, sera autant que possible, mis hors jeu. Si par miracle et force de volonté, l'ancien Président est quand même capable de surmonter le fort courant contre lui, il méritera d'autant plus d'être élu.
Et peut-être pourrait-t-on dire la même chose aujourd'hui à l'égard de Marine Le Pen.

Mais aujourd'hui certains media ont cédé leur place privilégiée à un autre 'Etat', celui de l'argent. Actuellement il y a un pouvoir d'argent quasi illimité chez certains mégalomanes. Ces personnages qui se prennent littéralement pour des dieux, essaient de le démontrer en achetant les politiciens et en plaçant stratégiquement leurs pions dépourvus d'intégrité où il peuvent pour arriver à réaliser leurs objectifs. A l'heure actuelle ce qui se passe à ce sujet est très préoccupant. C'est aussi pour cette raison que les élections américaines n'ont jamais été autant cruciales et déterminantes.

Certains ne peuvent pas s'empêcher de se vendre pour de l'argent, y compris bien entendu certains media. Aujourd'hui tout peut être acheté impunément, même, il semble, la vie d'un individu estimé trop gênant. Si une candidate des présidentielles est programmée pour gagner, il faut que ce soit le cas. Aujourd'hui les media, si assez persuadés, ne vont pas crier sur les toits pour exiger des enquêtes pour élucider de tels assassinats.

De nos jours on est porté à avoir relativement si peu de confiance envers les media, que l'on cherche à s'informer ailleurs, en échangeant des informations que l'on trouve. Ironiquement Facebook est devenu une plateforme pour cet échange d'info. Informations souvent bien documentées avec des vidéos et des photos témoignant leur exactitude. Et rarement on trouvera ces informations publiées dans les média courants qui normalement les auraient jugées trop crues, dérangeantes, et surtout trop politiquement incorrectes. Mais même Facebook est sous pression de censurer ceux qui osent traverser certaines bornes établies, et de toute façon, il faut toujours être discernant et selectif.

Poutine n'a-t-il pas raison lorsqu'il affirme que la démocratie n'existe plus à l'Occident? C'est l'argent et le politiquement correct qui comptent. Ce sont ces deux faux prophètes qui règnent au dessus de tout, et les media croient devoir en être assujettis, eux aussi. C'est un cercle vicieux et empoisonné.

La question ultime est: qu'est ce que l'on serait prêt à vendre pour de l'argent? Son identité culturelle, son pays, sa raison d'être, son âme?
Un vrai philanthrope peut faire énormément de bien, même parfois des miracles, avec peu d'argent, sinon rien. On l'a déjà vu assez de fois. Un faux philanthrope multi-milliardaire, celui qui se prend pour Dieu, peut faire énormément de mal, si on lui laisse la liberté de le faire. D'ailleurs on est justement en train de voir à quel point.
Tout dépend sur ce que l'on veut, y compris quel avenir pour le monde on aimerait contribuer à déterminer.

Les media, eux aussi, ne devraient-ils pas commencer à se poser la même question, au lieu de ne voir que leurs intérêts à court terme? Car en fin du compte, une mauvaise décision, un choix mal inspiré, n'arrangent jamais rien pour personne, comme on a pu le constater avec l'Express, pour citer seulement un exemple français.

Les meilleurs journaux anglais ont perdu toute leur valeur pour avoir donné priorité au pouvoir de l'argent au lieu de leur identité, intégrité et réputation.
La responsabilité des media est énorme. Il va sans dire que ceux qui les gèrent doivent assumer cette responsabilité de manière à répondre pleinement aux conséquences des informations vraies ou fausses, qu'ils choisirent de publier.

La BBC, autrefois une référence d'excellence internationale, est devenue plutôt une référence de médiocrité, et de partialité honteuse. D'ailleurs on dirait que sans aucun état d'âme, les responsables et les media anglais se sont vendus aux plus payants, comme les Saoudiens, par exemple. Par conséquence en relativement peu de temps la GB risque de devenir passivement un Etat Islamique. En effet on peut bruler l'Union-Jack impunément en Angleterre, mais gare aux anglais qui veulent brûler le drapeau d'ISIS, dans ce cas liberté d'expression oblige.. 

Le drame qui se déroule dans le monde aujourd'hui est bien trop sérieux pour permettre aux média de continuer à abuser de leurs lecteurs. Il est trop grave pour que l'on continue à laisser jouer très mal aux échecs géopolitiques les cyniques mégalomanes, les lucifériens. Ces piètres profiteurs parasites et leurs acolytes, tous ceux qui croient être les seuls privilégiés à bien gagner sur les tragédies des autres, ne gagnent strictement rien, lorsque c'est au détriment du monde entier.
                                                             
$

Text and image (Silver Jubilee Victorian Crown 1887-1892, showing St. George slaying the dragon.
On the face side figures a profile of Queen Victoria).

 © Mirino. October, 2016
                                           

Verity


I often think about the admirable citation borrowed by the Italian writer, Susanna Tamaro, from a certain Frère Roger's words, that "truth is not a colour, it is light". Naturally white light is the result of all the component colours of the rainbow. This principle of truth can be applied to everything.
It applies to day and night, life and death. It applies to historic facts obviously without exception, the history of civilisation, of our world and of the whole universe. It applies to the all the accomplishments and failures of mankind, and to all the natural creations of God, or whatever name one wishes to use to designate the Almighty Power.
But it doesn't only englobe positive aspects, it must englobe negative aspects as well, for the same principle applies. Nothing positive can exist without its negative counterpart. There can be no life without death.
One could advance that black is the result of all component opaque colours. They lack transparency. Black therefore doesn't reflect light. (This lack of capacity to reflect, also seems appropriate for the regressive, evil, imbeciles who wave black flags).
Paradise and inferno are only spiritual concepts of the ultimate, imagined destinations of every individual, even though man has the capacity and choice of contributing to create earthly hell or earthly paradise.

Some of these thoughts are no doubt repeated elsewhere in Viewfinder, including the very first effort in 2008, but perhaps today they are more pertinent than ever. They introduce a question regarding the consequences of the inane efforts of over-rich sectarians who like to believe they are gods themselves. Consequences that are having a very negative effect on our lives at this particular time.

The question again regards verity. If Islamic ideology pretends to represent the truth, it would never need to be imposed on anyone in anyway. We always, ultimately accept the truth without it being forced upon us. Even those who try to live a lie rarely do so without finally acknowledging the truth and coming to terms with it. One cannot hide, or indefinitely deform the truth. It would be like denying the reality of life and death. As soon as one tries to impose what one persuades oneself to be the incontestable truth, either by way of reasoning, or by physical force, whatever one is trying to impose, automatically and irrevocably becomes false.

A true religion is a very personal conviction. Each person, often unconsciously, has his or her own particular belief. This faith is an individual right. Ironically many people who believe they are atheists, are in fact fundamentally religious. Being religious doesn't mean one has to attend Church services each Sunday. It certainly doesn't mean one should make a massive bottoms-up public show of numbers of one's so-called faith with false humility. It doesn't demand that men should get together to flagellate themselves, or to cruelly slaughter animals. And threatening violence, killing, beheading, torturing, raping, etc., pretexting to defend one's feigned faith in atrocious ways is pure evil. It negates even the validity of an ideology, and can never possibly be associated with any religion.

Treating women as slaves, jealously concealing their beauty instead of proudly and respectfully acknowledging natural femininity; according them less than the minimum of consideration, even stoning them for the misfortune of having been rape victims of depraved beings that have no right to consider themselves human, is also pure evil. Destroying the innocence and magic of childhood, and by extention the future, by conditioning children to hate and to kill, is equally demonic.

To be truly religious there is only one basic requirement. This covers everything by extension. The requirement is simply to believe that the universe, its incredible mechanism, and life itself in all its forms, did not come about by pure chance or accident. Yet we, relatively insignificant beings in relation to this immense and magnificent cosmos, and the marvel of life itself, are naturally an integral part of it all. This humility, realisation and wonder should induce us to regard everything with joy and profound respect, because everything is part of The Creation. The men amongst us particularly acclaim, admire and adore women because although our modest participation is naturally essential, their life giving force is extraordinary, miraculous, and awe-inspiring.

The miracle of life in all its forms, 'all creatures great and small',  from which we still have so much to learn, yet we still take too much for granted. This life, this verity, all that we see around us, is our earthly paradise. Although we could more easily destroy than conserve this very precious loan, naturally we have the responsibility to bequeath it intact, if not more embellished than ever, to our children for them to eventually assume the same responsibility.

Spiritual paradise is a beautiful image conserved within us. Only a disorientated fool would believe that somewhere celestial, there is an Edenic garden of apple trees, vineyards and virgins, cascades of pristine water, birds of paradise, etc. How can anything be living if paradise is immortal, therefore sterile? Who plants the fruit trees and prunes the vines? What eggs hatched the birds of paradise, or what birds laid the eggs? How could ghosts of servile women still garbed in their burkas be enjoyed by degenerates, without the vital life creating force and instinct? How can one possibly be led to believe such rubbish without being totally regressive and brainless?

Those who have such meagre respect for life, have no respect for truth, which essentially is God. They who contribute to make mortal hell on earth, can never possibly be rewarded with even a mere fabulation of immortal paradise.
If a real destination exists between the two spiritual concepts, then it would only be hell. If you willingly contribute to create mortal hell on earth, it is bound to be your final vision, your ultimate destination and personal legacy.

 
Text and image © Mirino. September, 2016

Trumplea



When H. Clinton campaigned for the Democratic nomination for President of the USA in 2008, one got the impression that she had more clout and conviction than Obama, which wouldn't be too difficult in any case. When I first heard Trump make a public speech, I must admit I wasn't too impressed.

Most people appreciate that first impressions are often false. It also takes time to get to know a person, according to factual information made available. When the choice is limited to two main presidential candidates, obviously one must refer to whatever reliable information one finds to be able to decide who best to vote for.
It's amusing to note that what Obama had to say to discredit Hillary Clinton in 2008 is the exact opposite to what he now says in her support.

Many people might be swayed by considerations that are essentially beside the point. One would not be choosing a first female President in the history of the USA, as opposed to yet another male President, for example, one would be choosing the best possible President under the actual, momentous, social, economical, national and international circumstances.

More than ever, the American Presidential elections are not just a national affair. They concern the whole world (which is also why Viewfinder is taking this liberty) and at this particular epoch the choice is absolutely crucial.
Maybe for the first time in American history the choice is not simply between Democrats and Republicans. It's not a question of swinging from one traditional political tendency to the other, or of choosing not to do so. This time there are much larger political and ideological issues at stake. There may be certain Republicans, for example, who could be quite sold on the ideology of eventually opting for a neo-Marxist global government system, to the detriment of 'dated democracy'. Even if this meant the gradual cultural destruction of nations as we know them. To the elite ideological theoreticians, such sacrifices would be justified by the 'subsequent results'...

These are the stakes that determine the choice, and the choice is simple. On one side there is a candidate who is financially committed to implement "Sorosian dystopia" (chaos). Therefore in keeping, H. Clinton will continue to allow mass, quasi uncontrolled immigration of mostly Muslim males into the USA.
On the other side there is a Republican candidate who is already aware of what is taking place, but is totally free institutionally, politically and financially to apply a policy of common sense that counters such chaos creating recipes. He has not been bought out by any sectarian multi-billionaire, or by any Arabian States.

More serious is the fact that as the Soros and Rothschild, etc., project seems to be treated as a priority, it could even lead to war with Russia, who understandably rejects the inane NWO idea.
Any sensible person would reason that to solve the problems caused by ISIS, including the persecution of Christians, Copts and Kurds in the Middle East, and the essential problem of Syria, cooperation with Russia is primordial, absolutely essential. Obviously there is no other way.
The fact that Obama has, at least up until now, with only two months left of his mandate, rejected any real cooperation with Russia, underlines the importance he seems to accord to an absurd ideology above the real and immediate interests of the world in terms of humanity, and this without even considering the economic and social interests of the USA.
H. Clinton is on the same political wave length as Obama, but the danger she represents could be even greater, because she is power hungry, vain, temperamental, and sometimes even foolhardy. She may also have a health problem that could complicate things even further.

Additionally there is proof of her being a security risk. By all accounts corroborated by the FBI, yet she seems to benefit already from legal immunity, however much that costs those who have generously invested in her. It may be a very bad investment however, and not only because of her health problem. But for the Sorosian project that must have cost so many millions to initiate, she is irreplaceable. Literally no one else would ever do what she is prepared to do to satisfy her patrons that would neither be in the interests of the USA, nor the world.

The choice is simple. If one chooses H. Clinton, mass, uncontrolled immigration will continue in the USA. This will also encourage the continuation of the same irresponsible open border senselessness in Europe and elsewhere (Canada and Australia) in keeping with the inane, destructive project. Worse, and incredibly, it could even lead to conflict with Russia.

If one chooses D. Trump, uncontrolled immigration will cease. There will be greater border control. For the Middle East problems that are being ignobly exploited by the multi-billionaire megalomaniacs, Trump will very likely cooperate with Putin to get things sorted out at last, not only by getting rid of ISIS, but by finding a common solution to end the noxious civil and ethnic wars in Syria.
Common sense must prevail, internally (reuniting all Americans and starting to get the economy back on track) as well as externally (effective cooperation with world leaders to solve the real international problems). Then who knows? Perhaps even the media will start doing their job with the integrity that was once the hall mark of real journalism.
*
 
Text © Mirino. (With many thanks for the use of the 11/9/  memorial anniversary image). September, 2016

Succo di pomodoro




A volte mi chiedo se non sono diventato più pazzo di quanto già non lo sia, poiché ciò che accade nel mondo d’oggi è così incredibile che, per riuscire a crederci, diventa quasi normale dubitare della sua salute mentale.

Alludo naturalmente al progetto delle élite, di quei megalomani troppo ricchi che, senza molta conoscenza della storia, e pensando forse di essere quasi divini, prendono iniziative inaudite, pericolose ed irresponsabili. Mi riferisco al cosiddetto “nuovo ordine mondiale” che, secondo questi illuminati e settari, sarà stabilito grazie all'afflusso di milioni di migranti musulmani (degenerati o no).

Nonostante gli avvertimenti dati alle mie sorelle altrove, i miei dubbi sono rinforzati dalla loro reazione. Esse non sono di fatto pronte ad accettare uno scenario così folle. È piuttosto comprensibile. Poi non se ne parla nei giornali che hanno l'abitudine di leggere, beninteso...

E qui, in Italia dove sono, è anche difficile crederlo. Questo luogo è un paradiso dove la gente è molto simpatica. Raramente ho conosciuto tale gentilezza così generosa e sincera. In più abbiamo un orto qui vicino, gratuito. I vicini mi hanno persino aiutato a lavorare la terra e preparare il terreno prima di piantare. Poi è proprio una comunione con la terra e la natura, ed è affascinante.

Prima le piccoli piante di pomodoro, ad esempio, sono così fragili, talvolta troppo. Ma col tempo le piante dei pomodori del tipo “cuore di bue” possono crescere alte due metri con grappoli che pesano fra due e quattro chili. Poi ci vogliono pazienza e sole perché diventino rossi. Nel mio caso, per essere alla mia prima esperienza, non è andata troppo male, ma ovviamente ho sempre molto da apprendere.
Qui il giardinaggio è un modo di vita, ma i miei vicini, che riescono a fare un po’ di tutto, compressi un buon vino e un olio d’oliva di qualità, non sono giovani. Per essi curare i loro giardini è una passione, ed è questa la ragione per cui questo luogo è un vero paradiso.

Purtroppo i loro figli sono meno entusiasti. Si tratta di una generazione che pensa che siccome frutta, verdura e pomodori di stagione costano poco, non c’è ragione di affaticarsi tanto a coltivarle. In termini economici questo è vero, ma in termini di valori reali, di cuore, di amore, ed anche in termini spirituali, si sbagliano.
Sembrerebbe quindi che anche certi paradisi sono destinati ad essere effimeri.

Questi considerazioni ci riportano ancora al progetto malsano di megalomani. Quelli che hanno consacrato le loro vite ad accumulare denaro, ma in realtà non hanno mai vissuto. Sono quindi essenzialmente poveri. Per questo motivo credono che cambiare il mondo, anche in peggio, sarà una specie di compensazione per le loro vite vuote. Ma evidentemente anche loro si sbagliano.

Su Facebook, perché è utile sapere ciò che accade nel mondo, anche se certe cose vengono censurate, ho visto la foto di ancora un altro Musulmano arrabbiato. Quest'uomo teneva un cartellone su cui era scritto "kill all the Juice". Evidentemente voleva dire "kill all the Jews", cioè "ammazza tutti gli ebrei" (juice in inglese vuol dire succo, mentre Jews sono gli ebrei).
Possiamo nondimeno consolarci sempre con il succo di pomodoro...


Text and photo © Mirino. (With thanks to Rob). August, 2016