Lockdown, Vaccines, and the Occult 9

Part 9: Free will

In the Bible the story of man begins in the book of Genesis with Adam and Eve, to whom God gives the Garden of Eden. There, everything the couple needed was provided on the condition that they, “not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will certainly die.”

A serpent suggests to Eve that, despite the abundance with which she has been provided, she needs more. Of eating the forbidden fruit, “You will not certainly die,” the serpent says to the woman. “For God knows that when you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.”

Adam and Eve succumb to the temptation, with calamitous consequences. God ejects them from their garden paradise and their default state becomes one of suffering -of hunger, thirst, and toil. This episode is known as the Fall.

In 2020 the serpent in the ear of the people came in the form of the minions of the state, whose words were amplified by the mass media. Politicians, medics, and scientific advisors created a climate of fear, despite at times expressly informing the public that there was nothing of which to be afraid. Information necessary to see through the scamdemic was presented and freely available. We have considered this strange circumstance in the context of 'revelation of the method.' It appears that the malevolent intelligence behind the infliction of the harms of lockdown and vaccines is bound by rules of engagement. Some people attribute this to an awareness of the consequences of Natural Law. The inhibition with regards to inflicting direct harm is ascribed to a fear of inevitable spiritual or energetic consequences.

During lockdown it was certainly notable that the state did not directly attack people. Instead it persuaded people to consent to their own downfall.

On March 24^th, 2020, many British people received text messages from the UK Government informing them that they “must stay at home.”

UK police chiefs urged the public to comply with government rules, acknowledging that “our policing is with the consent of the people,” but then with no sense of irony, threatening that, “If the public do not comply with this lockdown the police will use their powers to enforce it.”

The Commissioner of the London Metropolitan Police, Cressida Dick, said enforcing the coronavirus lockdown rules will be the "last resort" for her force. “Our approach is one entirely of trying to help educate and encourage people.” Why? When people break the law in other ways, are they educated or arrested? If the virus and lockdown stories were true, lives were at risk.

UK Health Secretary Matt Hancock said of the UK's track and trace programme on 27^th, May 2020, “If you are told to self-isolate you must, it is your civic duty. This will be voluntary at first but we can quickly make it mandatory if that's what it takes.”

In the United States, Anthony Fauci informed people that,

"Mandates are necessary to push resistant Americans to get the shot. Hopefully, they will do it willingly. If not, there will have to be things that will essentially put pressure on them. I believe, once we start doing that, you will see more and more willingly get vaccinated.”

Both Hancock and Fauci were effectively saying the public had no choice but to comply, so why were their schemes not made mandatory from the start?

There are, if not rules of engagement, conventions which present obstacles to such measures.

The UNESCO declaration of human rights reads,

"1. Any preventive, diagnostic and therapeutic medical intervention is only to be carried out with the prior, free and informed consent of the person concerned, based on adequate information. The consent should, where appropriate, be express and may be withdrawn by the person concerned at any time and for any reason without disadvantage or prejudice."

In the UK, the exemptions made available for mask mandates read as follows.

“This includes (but is not limited to):

people for whom putting on, wearing or removing a face covering will cause severe distress."

No medical certificate or "written evidence," was required. Masking was a choice.

During lockdown people were led to believe that they could not travel, though others were travelling at will. When restrictions for unvaccinated people were introduced, many took the injections in order to go on their holidays. These conditions of travel were later discontinued.

In the UK all prosecutions under the coronavirus act were dropped. Thousands who refused to pay Fixed Penalty Notices were exonerated.

Around the world people were encouraged to take the covid injections with a variety of inducements that included hamburgers, ice cream, donuts, beer and even sex. Pop stars and tv hosts sang and danced, and movie stars cajoled and threatened, people into compliance.

Despite the far-reaching nature of lockdown and the seemingly all pervasive reach of the totalitarianism, the requirement upon the perpetrators to achieve the consent of their victims is suggestive of a greater power whose rules cannot be contravened. Some people see this power as being not Natural Law but God. Others see it as evidence of psychopaths making sport of their prey as a cat with a mouse.

It is of course possible both that there could be rules and that the predators could enjoy the game.

Even on the most prosaic level it could be argued that the disparity in numbers between the predators and the public makes the manufacture of mass consent a practical form of attack. The disadvantage of this tactic is that the multi-generational process of gradual propaganda and mind control seems very slow to mere mortals accustomed to immediate gratification. It also seems unreliable as it can be rejected by the potential victims at any point.

Yet this seems to have been the procedure adopted and in it there is cause for optimism. At any point state narratives can be ignored and people can choose to finish the story in their own way.

Even where the mandates were most stringently applied it appears that the coercion had limits, and usually allowed for refusal -albeit often with the consequence of lost employment or opportunities. Some videos circulated on social media of instances of forced vaccination, with one example being from India. If these videos were genuine it is possible that these were the actions of over-enthusiastic dupes of whom the state could wash its hands. For the most part it seems that if the individual was confident or self-sufficient enough to walk away from the coercive organisations controlled by the system, injection could be avoided. It seems dependence on the state and its financial system has been cultivated and a harsh code of self-reliance then applied to those who refused the invasion of their bodies. Those people who were unable to forego their accustomed pleasures or without sufficient faith in providence accepted the shot. Those reliant on state care were at its mercy.

In terms of the paradigm of poles of good and evil in the form of God and Satan, it appears that Satan requires God's children to turn their back on their creator and to willingly embrace a modified or corrupted version of his creation. A parallel here can be drawn with what Yuval Noah Harari explained when he announced that ‘covid’ was the moment that government “surveillance went under the skin,” and the start of a “new era in which humans are now hackable animals,” before adding that the era of "free will -that's over.”

Warnings have been made in some quarters of precisely this eventuality. In 1995 theologist and health practitioner Pierre Gilbert cautioned of mandated vaccines that would be used to implant in the brain, “micro-receivers of electromagnetic fields where waves of very low frequencies will be sent. And through these low-frequency waves, people will be unable to think, you’ll be turned into a zombie.” After the vaccination roll-out of 2021, injected people were reported to be emitting low frequency signals.

Harari's views seem to be in line with an alternative interpretation of the story of the Fall held by freemasons, and supposed dissidents such as David Icke. This ‘gnostic’ paradigm posits that knowledge is withheld by a malevolent God who holds mankind captive in a harsh and unforgiving world. As we have examined, this is the perspective presented in movies like The Matrix. In this view the serpent is seen as benign and helpful and man rails against the restrictions of creation.

In the conventional view, instead of making obedient automatons or a garden without temptation God created Man with free will. As in the Bible story, it appears that we have been given what we need without the interventions of those who speak with forked tongue. Do we require injections of unknown or toxic ingredients for our well-being? Are we under attack from this Garden of Eden or from the air that we breathe? Do we need to modify the seemingly miraculous working of our bodies?

We get to choose.