Tuesday, September 30, 2014

Abiotic Oil Formation and strategies

Though the current accepted theory of oil formation involves the slow transformation of animal and plant matter into hydrocarbon (the biotic or biogenic theory), it is not the only theory that has been put forth. As early as the 16th century, one theory of the origin of oil claimed that it resulted from deep carbon deposits that have been around far longer than life on this planet. The theory, which came to be known as the abiotic oil formation (AOF) theory, was largely forgotten until rather recently when a few people (some of them scientists) revived it.

The newest version of the AOF theory states that oil arises from inorganic processes that occur deep within the core or lower mantle of the Earth. Here, they say, oil is formed and then percolates up through cracks and porous rock to fill the reservoirs that humans tap to get oil. If this claim is true, then oil may not be nearly as limited in quantity as proponents of the biotic theory claim. This would mean oil is more “renewable” than we have been led to believe.


The AOF theory has been championed for a number of reasons, but many current proponents point to the presence of methane on comets, meteors, and other lifeless planets as evidence that organic material is not needed to produce petroleum. Other supporters point to other clues about the origins of oil such as the distribution of metals in oil, the association of hydrocarbons with helium, and the presence of oil deposits in large-scale structures rather than patchy sedimentary deposits. These, proponents claim, are all reasons to believe that oil does not come from plant and animal matter, but rather from some natural chemical process involving inorganic materials.

The theory persists for a number of reasons, but one of the biggest is that no one has actually ever witnessed the formation of oil. Because it takes millions of years for a fossil fuel to form, any theories we have about the process of formation is based on observations of current material. It is possible to speculate, make predictions and test those predictions to gain evidence to support or reject a given theory, but it is not possible to be as certain about the formation of oil as we are about something like the formation ice, which we can directly observe. So, which theory has more supporting evidence?


Most scientists believe the evidence comes down decidedly on the side of oil forming from deceased organic matter. They point to very strong chemical evidence (so called “biomarkers”) that show hydrocarbons have an organic origin and not an inorganic origin. They also point out that various stages of hydrocarbon development have been uncovered, showing the progression from say peat all the way to anthracite coal or from algae to oil. They also argue that small quantities of hydrocarbon can be produced in laboratories, thus strong supporting their stance.

Proponents of the abiotic theory are not without their evidence, however. These scientists point to the fact that oil reservoirs have been shown to refill when left alone for periods of time, something that does not fit with the biotic theory. They also point to the presence of oil on meteors and other bodies that do not and never have supported life. They also suggest that claims about the chemical nature of oil are spurious because we do not know what processes occur deep in the Earth that may cause oil to look as though it came from an organic source when it did not. It is also true that oil can be produced from inorganic material, lending support to this theory.


Most scientists support the biotic theory of oil production for a number of reasons. In response to the evidence for the abiotic theory, they say the following.

First, refilling of wells can be explained by two phenomena. One, our ability to extract oil from more difficult environments is constantly increasing. As a result, wells that were once “tapped out” can now be reopened and produce again using new technology. Two, because oil moves and is of different densities, it is true that pumping oil from a well may relieve pressure, which then allows oil trapped in cracks, faults, and other pockets to enter the well over time.

The second reason many scientists doubt the abiotic theory is that its basic tenets don’t seem to be viable. Namely, the idea that rocks at great depth are porous is the opposite of what research shows. Of course, proponents of the theory point to the fact that magma manages to escape, so why not petroleum.

The third and most substantial reason for discounting the abiotic theory is that the chemistry doesn’t add up. First, there doesn’t seem to be enough CO2 below the surface of the Earth to make the formation of oil possible. In scientific terms, the mass balance of the equation is errant. More importantly, however, is the distinct isotopic and biochemical structure of oil, which strongly support and organic origin. For example, helium that is trapped with hydrocarbon deposits (and is an inert gas so it does not react with anything), is of a specific character that means it almost certainly came from the surface of the Earth and not anywhere else.

What is clear is that these issues require more research and, given the importance of oil to our energy needs, many prestigious institutions are working to solve the dilemma. In the United States, scientists from the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute are attempting to determine just how deep oil deposits can be found. The deeper they are, the less likely it is that they came from biotic origin.

The other possibility here is the both groups are right. Oil may form through both processes. If so, then oil may not be as limited a resource as we currently surmise.


Like many issues, politics play a major role in the abiotic versus biotic oil formation argument. Until recent decades, the main argument propelling each was the supposedly limited supply of fossil fuel available. For those pumping it from the ground, limiting supply has financial gain. For politicians, a limited supply can be used to control people and as justification for actions like war. An unlimited supply, on the other hand, means that we need not worry about running out, that we ought to be able to drill for more oil and increase the daily supply so as to decrease price, and so forth.
The arguments above, however, have been pushed aside in recent years by fears that global warming is directly attributable to carbon dioxide produced by burning hydrocarbons. If this is true, it doesn’t matter if oil is limited or not because using it is causing immense damage.
In the end, science will settle the debate, but what science gets funded is directly related to which politicians are in power and who is footing the bill. At some point we will know the definitive answers to questions about the origin of oil and to questions about the impact of CO2 on the environment.

Abiotic Oil and Gas: A Theory That Refuses To Vanish

In the West it is almost universally held that all oil and gas is derived from fossils. This is not the case elsewhere, particularly among Russian and Ukrainian scientists who have, over several generations, tenaciously propounded the notion that oil and gas are abiotic, can be found deep below the surface of the earth in most parts of the world and in very large amounts.

Western geologists and scientists find the theory either annoying or amusing and refuse to consider it seriously although there are exceptions. The theory continues to be held in much higher regard by Russian scientists and geologists (including some working in the West) for historical and perhaps ideological reasons.

Many Russian geologists and petroleum researchers credit the rise of Russia over the past 50 years as the largest producer of oil and second largest producer of natural gas in the world to the successful application of the abiogenic theory of oil and gas formation. The Russians claim to have successfully drilled over 300 ultra deep (around 40,000feet) oil and gas wells through granite and basalt based on this theory. These claims have been questioned by Western geologists and petroleum engineers.

The most recent attempt at gaining credence for the abiogenic idea was only a few months ago. A research team at the Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden, led by Vladimir Kutherov, demonstrated that animal and plant fossils are not necessary for producing oil and natural gas. The team simulated the thermal and pressure processes that occur in the inner layers of the earth to generate hydrocarbons, the chief component of oil and natural gas. The team also noted that oil and gas has been found 7 miles below ground in Texas and fossil oil and gas could not, via, gravity have seeped down to such depths.

According to the Prof. Kutherov all types of bedrock can serve as reservoirs of hydrocarbon energy and their method of discovery can enhance exploration success rates from 20 % to 70 %. The research team has developed a new technique for locating oil and gas resources. It consists of dividing the globe into a fine grid, which corresponds to underground fissures or migration channels. Hydrocarbon resources will be found wherever migration channels intersect, predicts the team.
An  abiogenic theory of petroleum is not new, dating from the 16thcentury .In the 19th century two very accomplished scientists, Alexander von Humboldt and Dimitri Mendeleev( of the Periodic Table fame) advanced the concept. In the 20th century the Russian- Ukrainian School of geology emerged in the Soviet Union to vigorously formulate the modern theory of abiogenic oil and gas. In the West, the most eloquent and determined proponent was the famous astronomer Thomas Gold. After his death, Jack Kenney of Gas Resources Corporation has become the leading Western exponent.

The prevailing abiotic theory is that the full complement of hydrocarbons found in oil and gas are generated in the mantle (40 to 90 miles below the surface of the earth) by non-biological processes. These hydrocarbons then migrate out of the mantle into the crust where they escape or are trapped by impermeable strata that lead to reservoir formation.

Specific examples to support the abiotic theory have been cited over the years. Each example has been dismissed by the Western establishment as specious while it has been hailed by proponents as convincing. This is always so when a deeply entrenched belief and massive money flows encounter a subversive idea that profoundly threatens the prevailing order. The debate is becoming increasingly shrill as the two diametrically opposed views of Peak Oil and Abiogenic(Superabundant) Oil collide in a clash not only of science but, far more importantly, of money and ideology.

Specific examples cited are the impressive recharging from below, not the sides, of the Eugene Island field (wells in deep decline exhibiting sharply increased production; recovery far in excess of  estimated remaining reserves) off new Orleans; the White Tiger oil field in Vietnam( discovered by a Russian company, Vietsovpetro) in fractured basement granite; the Panhandle-Hugoton field (high helium content) in Texas-Oklahoma, the Shengli Field and Songliao Basin in Northeastern China (supposedly mantle derived natural gas), and the well known Chimaera natural gas seep in Turkey. This seep has been known to be continuously active for thousands of years and represents the largest cataloged emission of abiogenic methane on land. The vast amounts of methane released by the biggest mud volcano eruptions are allegedly greater than found in the most abundant natural gas fields in commercial production. The presence of considerable amounts of hydrocarbons not associated with tectonic structures is also presented as evidence and, of course, the enormous methane hydrate deposits found all over the world are asserted to be of abiogenic origin. Finally, theory advocates aver that the impressive record of recent ultra deep drilling in the Gulf of Mexico supports their idea.

The matrix of scientific, political and business interests in the West, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Brazil (an emerging oil exporter of consequence) and Venezuela that refuses to countenance abiogenic theories is big and potent. These interests want oil and gas to be scarce and expensive for a variety of reasons. It is natural and understandable that no credible test of the theory will be attempted within the ambit of these interests.
The Russian authorities and oil and gas companies seem to be deeply conflicted between intellectual pride (it is their theory, after all) and the desire to keep oil and gas prices high via the idea of scarcity when talking to the rest of the world about their abiogenic oil and gas reserves.

It seems to the author, however, that China and India have compelling economic and national security interests in proving or disproving the theory, convincingly. If the theory is false then they are no worse off than today. If it is correct then they, of the major nations in the world, have the most to gain in subverting the prevailing oil and gas order of the world. So, of course, do scores of millions of ordinary Americans who care nothing about theories but want cheap, abundant, reliable oil and gas.

US and UK Openly Approves Hong Kong Chaos it Created

Image: The US now openly supports chaos on the streets of Hong Kong, this
after condemning "occupy" protests in Bangkok, Thailand, earlier this year. The
difference being in Thailand, protests sought to oust a US proxy, Hong Kong
protests seek to put one into power. 
September 30, 2014 (Tony Cartalucci - LD) - The "Occupy Central" protests in Hong Kong continue on - destabilizing the small southern Chinese island famous as an international hub for corporate-financier interests, and before that, the colonial ambitions of the British Empire. Those interests have been conspiring for years to peel the island away from Beijing after it was begrudgingly returned to China in the late 1990's, and use it as a springboard to further destabilize mainland China.

Behind the so-called "Occupy Central" protests, which masquerade as a "pro-democracy" movement seeking "universal suffrage" and "full democracy," is a deep and insidious network of foreign financial, political, and media support. Prominent among them is the US State Department and its National Endowment for Democracy (NED) as well as NED's subsidiary, the National Democratic Institute (NDI).

Now, the US has taken a much more overt stance in supporting the chaos their own manipulative networks have prepared and are now orchestrating. The White House has now officially backed "Occupy Central." Reuters in its article, "White House Shows Support For Aspirations Of Hong Kong People," would claim:
The White House is watching democracy protests in Hong Kong closely and supports the "aspirations of the Hong Kong people," White House spokesman Josh Earnest said on Monday. "
The United States supports universal suffrage in Hong Kong in accordance with the Basic Law and we support the aspirations of the Hong Kong people," said Earnest, who also urged restraint on both sides.
US State Department Has Built Up and Directs "Occupy Central"

Image: The US through NED and its subsidiaries have a long history of
promoting subversion and division within China. 
Earnest's comments are verbatim the demands of "Occupy Central" protest leaders, but more importantly, verbatim the long-laid designs the US State Department's NDI articulates on its own webpage dedicated to its ongoing meddling in Hong Kong. The term "universal suffrage"and reference to "Basic Law" and its "interpretation" to mean "genuine democracy" is stated clearly on NDI's website which claims:
The Basic Law put in place a framework of governance, whereby special interest groups, or “functional constituencies,” maintain half of the seats in the Legislative Council (LegCo). At present, Hong Kong’s chief executive is also chosen by an undemocratically selected committee. According to the language of the Basic Law, however, “universal suffrage” is the “ultimate aim.” While “universal suffrage” remains undefined in the law, Hong Kong citizens have interpreted it to mean genuine democracy.

To push this agenda - which essentially is to prevent Beijing from vetting candidates running for office in Hong Kong, thus opening the door to politicians openly backed, funded, and directed by the US State Department - NDI lists an array of ongoing meddling it is carrying out on the island. It states:

Since 1997, NDI has conducted a series of missions to Hong Kong to consider the development of Hong Kong’s “post-reversion” election framework, the status of autonomy, rule of law and civil liberties under Chinese sovereignty, and the prospects for, and challenges to democratization.
It also claims:
In 2005, NDI initiated a six-month young political leaders program focused on training a group of rising party and political group members in political communications skills.
NDI has also worked to bring political parties, government leaders and civil society actors together in public forums to discuss political party development, the role of parties in Hong Kong and political reform. In 2012, for example, a conference by Hong Kong think tank SynergyNet supported by NDI featured panelists from parties across the ideological spectrum and explored how adopting a system of coalition government might lead to a more responsive legislative process.
NDI also admits it has created, funded, and backed other organizations operating in Hong Kong toward achieving the US State Department's goals of subverting Beijing's control over the island:
In 2007, the Institute launched a women’s political participation program that worked with the Women’s Political Participation Network (WPPN) and the Hong Kong Federation of Women’s Centres (HKFWC) to enhance women’s participation in policy-making, encourage increased participation in politics and ensure that women’s issues are taken into account in the policy-making process.

And on a separate page, NDI describes programs it is conducting with the University of Hong Kong to achieve its agenda:
The Centre for Comparative and Public Law (CCPL) at the University of Hong Kong, with support from NDI, is working to amplify citizens’ voices in that consultation process by creating Design Democracy Hong Kong (www.designdemocracy.hk), a unique and neutral website that gives citizens a place to discuss the future of Hong Kong’s electoral system.
It should be no surprise to readers then, to find out each and every "Occupy Central" leader is either directly linked to the US State Department, NED, and NDI, or involved in one of NDI's many schemes.

Image: Benny Tai, "Occupy Central's" leader, has spent years associated with
and benefiting from US State Department cash and support.
"Occupy Central's" self-proclaimed leader, Benny Tai, is a law professor at the aforementioned University of Hong Kong and a regular collaborator with the NDI-funded CCPL. In 2006-2007 (annual report, .pdf) he was named as a board member - a position he has held until at least as recently as last year. In CCPL's2011-2013 annual report (.pdf), NDI is listed as having provided funding to the organization to "design and implement an online Models of Universal Suffrage portal where the general public can discuss and provide feedback and ideas on which method of universal suffrage is most suitable for Hong Kong."

Curiously, in CCPL's most recent annual report for 2013-2014 (.pdf), Tai is not listed as a board member. However, he is listed as participating in at least 3 conferences organized by CCPL, and as heading at least one of CCPL's projects. At least one conference has him speaking side-by-side another prominent "Occupy Central" figure, Audrey Eu. The 2013-2014 annual report also lists NDI as funding CCPL's "Design Democracy Hong Kong" website.

Civic Party chairwoman Audrey Eu Yuet-mee, in addition to speaking at CCPL-NDI functions side-by-side with Benny Tai, is entwined with the US State Department and its NDI elsewhere. She regularly attends forums sponsored by NED and its subsidiary NDI. In 2009 she was a featured speaker at an NDI sponsored public policy forum hosted by "SynergyNet," also funded by NDI. In 2012 she was a guest speaker at the NDI-funded Women's Centre "International Women's Day" event, hosted by the Hong Kong Council of Women (HKCW) which is also annually funded by the NDI.

Image: Martin Lee and Anson Chan belly up to the table with US Vice President Joseph Biden in Washington DC earlier this year. During their trip, both Lee and Chan would attend a NED-hosted talk about the future of "democracy" in Hong Kong. Undoubtedly, "Occupy Central" and Washington's support of it was a topic reserved for behind closed doors.

There is also Martin Lee, founding chairman of Hong Kong's Democrat Party and another prominent figure who has come out in support of "Occupy Central." Just this year, Lee was in Washington meeting directly with US Vice President Joseph Biden, US Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi, and even took part in an NED talk hosted specifically for him and his agenda of "democracy" in Hong Kong. Lee even has a NED page dedicated to him after he was awarded in 1997 NED's "Democracy Award." With him in Washington was Anson Chan, another prominent figure currently supporting the ongoing unrest in Hong Kong's streets.

"Occupy Central's" Very Unpopular Agenda 

If democracy is characterized by self-rule, than an "Occupy Central" movement in which every prominent figure is the benefactor of and beholden to foreign cash, support, and a foreign-driven agenda, has nothing at all to do with democracy. It does have, however, everything to do with abusing democracy to undermine Beijing's control over Hong Kong, and open the door to candidates that clearly serve foreign interests, not those of China, or even the people of Hong Kong. Remember China has the network of over 5 millions secret societies members far more larger than the West counterpart.

Image: The National Endowment for Democracy and its various subsidiaries including the National Democratic Institute, are backed by immense corporate-financier interests who merely couch their hegemonic agenda behind "promoting democracy" and "freedom" worldwide. Above is a representation of the interests present upon NED's board of directors. 

What is more telling is the illegal referendum "Occupy Central" conducted earlier this year in an attempt to justify impending, planned chaos in Hong Kong's streets. The referendum focused on the US State Department's goal of implementing "universal suffrage" - however, only a fifth of Hong Kong's electorate participated in the referendum, and of those that did participate, no alternative was given beyond US-backed organizations and their respective proposals to undermine Beijing.

The BBC would report in its article, "Hong Kong democracy 'referendum' draws nearly 800,000," that:
A total of 792,808 voters took part in an unofficial referendum on universal suffrage in Hong Kong, organisers said.
The 10-day poll was held by protest group Occupy Central.
Campaigners want the public to be able to elect Hong Kong's leader, the chief executive. The Hong Kong government says the vote has no legal standing.
About 42% of voters backed a proposal allowing the public, a nominating committee, and political parties to name candidates for the top job.
For a protest movement that claims it stands for "democracy," implied to mean the will of the people, it has an unpopular agenda clearly rejected by the vast majority of Hong Kong's population - and is now disrupting vital parts of the island, holding the population and stability hostage to push its agenda. All of this is being orchestrated and supported by the United States, its State Department, and its network of global sedition operating under NED and its subsidiary NDI.

While the Western media shows mobs of "thousands" implying that "the people" support ongoing chaos in Hong Kong's streets, "Occupy Central's" own staged, illegal referendum proves it does not have the backing of the people and that its agenda is rejected both by mainland China and the people of Hong Kong.

The Crown has never been the King or Queen of England since the establishment of the corporate body, but the British Monarchy is a figurehead for The Crownrules parliament in Great Britain and has authority over the Prime Ministers through a Vatican knighthood called the Order of the Garter. The Order of the Garter is the secret inner group which is an elite group within the Order of St. John of Jerusalem which is the British part of the Knights of Malta. The Knights are the leaders of the Committee of 300 subservient to the Committee of 13. As long as Humanity is trapped inside their grid of this power structure, they will always be their slaves physically and intellectually.

Exposing the insidious, disingenuous, foreign-driven nature of "Occupy Central" is important. It is also important to objectively examine each and every protest that springs up around the world. Superficiality cannot "link" one movement to another, one group to hidden special interests. Rather, one must adhere to due diligence in identifying and profiling the leaders, following the money, identifying their true motivations, and documenting their links to special interests within or beyond the borders of the nation the protests are taking place in.

By doing this, movements like "Occupy Central" can be exposed, blunted, and rolled over before the destruction and chaos other US-backed destabilization efforts have exacted elsewhere - namely the Middle East and Ukraine - can unfold in Hong Kong.

Source: Land Destroyer.

Colonial Elite Rules China for the Illuminati

The reality is that China, the US, Thailand and the rest of the world are still part of the Holy Roman British Empire and politic is another form to entertain the sheeple:

Beijing -The Chinese elite is a merger between the Communist leadership, Hong Kong tycoons, and the criminal Triads. All three factions derive their power from Illuminati collaboration.

China has appeared autonomous because the Illuminati developed the country internally, funding 'revolutionary' political parties spouting nationalist slogans. The reasoning was that the Chinese people would revolt against overt foreign domination, but embrace their place in the NWO if they believed they were in control.

Lord Bertrand Russell revealed this plan in a report on China published in 1920:

'Out of the renaissance spirit now existing in China, it is possible, if foreign nations can be prevented from wreaking havoc, to develop a new civilization better than any that the world has yet known.'

The fascist superpower we know today was created in the second half of the 20th century by the bogus Cold War dialectic of communism vs. capitalism.

The stage was set in 1898 when Britain and China signed a contract stipulating that Hong Kong would be handed back to the Chinese in 1997. This meant that the fierce Communism of the mainland and laissez faire capitalism of Hong Kong were always destined to merge.

The process of unification gave rise to the current China power elite. What follows is background of the three main factions.


Because Communism is an Illuminati creation, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) are by definition, Illuminati agents.

Mao was a Soviet agent. (Mao-The Untold Story, Chang & Halliday, p.49.)
He was a product of the Yale in China  "Missionary" i.e. OSS, Skull & Bones program.

The CCP implemented policies that set the foundations for an Illuminati super state. They unified the country, attacked traditional Chinese culture, instigated industrialization programs and created a common language.

Wang Hao, a historian at the China Institute of International Studies, has recorded 
that Mao's deputy Zhou Enlai met David Rockefeller in June 1973:

'When meeting David Rockefeller, Zhou said to him that it was necessary to find appropriate methods conducive to the development of the trade between two sides under different political systems.'

The corporate-communist merger began when Deng Xiaoping came to power in the late 1970s and introduced his market reforms with the slogan "to get rich is glorious."

However, after 30 years of Maoism his regime was hopelessly ill equipped to run a market economy. They turned to the wealthiest Chinese tycoons in Hong Kong for guidance.


The most powerful HK tycoon is Li Ka-Shing, the richest Asian in the world and an Illuminati insider.

Other prominent tycoons are 'HK's godfather of real estate' Henry Fok, 'The king of gambling' Stanley Ho and the man who would be chosen by Beijing to head Hong Kong after the departure of the British, Tung Chee-Wa.

It is important to realize that these men rose to power and prestige in a British colony, i.e. they were vetted by the City of London to be colonial leaders. This is illustrated by the rise of Li Ka Shing.

As HK developed, Li emerged as the most brilliant Chinese entrepreneur. The 'Brotherhood bankers' of Hong Kong became aware of his mercantile genius and brought him into the fold.

In 1979 Li took control of Hutchinson Whampoa, one of the old British companies that had long dominated Hong Kong's economy. Companies of such political importance are not given away casually. In 2000, the Queen awarded Li the title of 'Knight (Commander of the Order) of the British Empire.'

In the early eighties, the tycoons and the communists had a series of meetings in Beijing. They struck a deal whereby the tycoons advised and educated the Chinese authorities about markets and in return Beijing gave them privileged access to their vast economic basin. In 1984 the two groups founded CITIC, the organization that managed China's transition to market economy.


The Triads is a collective term for the secret societies and criminal groups that originated in 18th century China with the aim to bring down the Qing dynasty.

For over a century the Illuminati waged war against the Qing dynasty. The Triads were their vehicle for subversion and revolution, in a similar fashion to Freemasonry in Western revolutions.

For instance, during the opium wars, the Triads helped bring the drug into China. The revolutionary Nationalist Government that toppled the Qing dynasty in 1912 was a coalition of triad groups. Sun Yat-sen, the man who led the nationalist coalition that toppled the Qing in 1912, was a Triad member and was trained and armed in British Hong Kong. Chiang Kai-shek was also a Triad member.

When the Communists achieved dominance in 1949 they kicked the Triads out of the country. They fled mainly to Hong Kong and Taiwan to re-build. Chiang Kai-shek continued to publicly receive US funding.

Today the Triads are best known as the world's largest criminal entity, involved in drug trafficking, prostitution, money laundering etc. They exist in any country with a large Chinese population, notably in Thailand, Singapore, Canada, Britain, USA and Australia.

Former Canadian diplomat Brian McAdam said: "Within each Chinese community, there's usually a strong Triad presence controlling and extorting money from the businesses, and if there's drugs, they're bringing them in."

Of the Triads enormous global reach Fritz Springmeier has written:

'The Triads are the most powerful criminal fraternal group in the world, except for the Illuminati and the families that make up the Illuminati's Committee of 300. The Mafia Is small peanuts compared to the Triads. The Triads are almost untouchable by any law enforcement group. For instance, in Great Britain the British do not have hardly any ethnic Chinese on their police force to even try infiltrating the Triads.'

A key source of this power is that they partner the Far East Lodges of Freemasonry in running the Asian drugs trade, notably the production of heroin in the 'golden triangle' in South East Asia, second only to Afghanistan. Drug trafficking is very important to the Illuminati because it funds black budget programs.

The most powerful Triads in Hong Kong have their own territories, headquarters, sub-societies and public fronts. They are allied with the tycoons. The tycoon's own Hong Kong and the triads run it. A few of these are Sun Yee On, Wo Hop To and 14K. To insure a smooth handover of Hong Kong in 1997, the communist leadership needed these groups onside.

In the early 80s, the Chinese government convened a secret meeting between the 'Dragon Heads' of the major Triad groups operational in Hong Kong. The communists informed the dragons that if they agreed not to interfere with the takeover transition, they would be allowed to continue their criminal activities without interference.

Following these successful negotiations, Deng Xiaoping spoke of the triads as Chinese "patriotic groups" and the Hong Kong press published a photograph of Charles Heung, a senior officer of Sun Yee On, conversing with Deng's daughter.

In 1992, Western Intelligence Services became aware Wong Man Fong - formerly head of China's central news agency - was helping the triads to set up legitimate businesses in China, particularly in Guangzhou and Shanghai.


The mainstream media portrays China as hostile to Western power. However, by studying the triumvirate Chinese elite and their intimate ties to the Illuminati, it is clear that modern China is an Illuminati creation. Read "Conflict Control", "Let's not be friend", and "Changing the balance of power".

The Chinese elite must never stray from the NWO agenda, for it follows that if the Illuminati made them, they can break them too.

Saturday, September 27, 2014

Atmospheric co2: a boon for the biosphere

Ready for a pop quiz? Name a colorless, odorless, tasteless gas that is found in the atmosphere in relatively minute quantities and is essential to nearly all life on earth. ___________. Time’s up! The answer is carbon dioxide.
Carbon dioxide, or CO2, was probably not the first molecule you thought to name. After all, in today’s world CO2 is given a bad rap. Ironically, some people even refer to the emission of this life-giving and life-sustaining gas into the atmosphere as “carbon pollution.” They fear its accumulation in the air because of computer model projections, which forecast a future of dangerous global warming and a host of other climate- and extreme-weather-related catastrophes if atmospheric CO2 concentrations continue to rise. And, therefore, in an effort to alleviate their concerns, these individuals seek government regulation of CO2 emissions as part of their overall objective to reduce the CO2 content of the air.
Efforts to regulate CO2 and reduce its concentration in the atmosphere, however, are way off the mark. Carbon dioxide is not a pollutant; and its increase in the air will have little, if any, impact on future climate. Literally thousands of scientific studies have demonstrated such. The recent work of the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC), for example, highlights many of the problems, inconsistencies and outright contradictions that exist between climate model projections and real-world observations. In a 1,000-page report released this past September, the NIPCC concluded there is nothing unusual, unnatural or unprecedented about Earth’s current climate and that the impact of rising CO2 on future climate will be small, if not negligible, which conclusion is a far cry from climate catastrophe.
Another damning indictment of the rising-CO2-will-cause-dangerous-global-warming narrative is seen in the failure of the climate models to predict the current plateau in global temperature. Despite an eight percent increase in atmospheric CO2, over the past 17 years, the earth experienced no net increase in temperature, yet all of the computer models upon which the vision of dangerous global warming is based projected it should have warmed.
Aside from having a rather benign – or possibly even nil – effect on climate, there are other reasons for rejecting efforts to regulate and reduce carbon dioxide.
Atmospheric CO2 is the building block of life. It is the primary raw material or “food” that plants utilize during the process of photosynthesis to construct their tissues and grow. And, as conclusively demonstrated in the peer-reviewed scientific literature, the modern rise in CO2 is benefiting the biosphere in multiple ways.
In general, atmospheric CO2 enrichment endows plants with three main benefits. The first and most recognized is enhanced plant productivity. Typically, a 300-parts-per- million (ppm) increase in the air’s CO2 content (which is expected to occur by the end of this century) will raise the productivity of most herbaceous plants by about one-third and most woody plants by about one-half. Such stimulation is generally manifested by an increase in the number of branches and tillers, more and thicker leaves, more extensive root systems and more flowers and fruit, and it portends great benefits for the biosphere. One obvious consequence is greater crop productivity; and many researchers acknowledge the yield-enhancing benefits of the historical and still-ongoing rise in the air’s CO2 content on past, present and future crop yields. According to one recent study, rising CO2 concentrations boosted the value of global crop production over the past 50 years by a staggering $3.2 trillion. An additional $9.8 trillion in monetary gains are estimated to accrue in the future in response to the projected rise in atmospheric CO2 between now and 2050.
The second major benefit is increased water use efficiency. Plants exposed to elevated levels of atmospheric CO2 generally do not open their leaf stomatal pores as wide as they do at lower CO2 concentrations. The result is a reduction in most plants’ rates of water loss by transpiration. The amount of carbon (biomass) they gain per unit of water lost – or water-use efficiency – therefore typically rises for a doubling of CO2 on the order of 70 to 100 percent. And as a result, at higher atmospheric CO2 concentrations numerous studies show plants need less water to produce the same or an even greater amount of biomass than they do at lower CO2 concentrations. One implication of this benefit is that plants will be able to grow and reproduce in locations where it was previously too dry for them to even exist; and they may therefore win back lands previously lost to desertification.
The third major benefit of atmospheric CO2 enrichment is an amelioration of environmental stresses and resource limitations. Higher levels of CO2 tend to help reduce detrimental growth effects of high soil salinity, high air temperature, low light intensity and low levels of soil fertility. They also reduce the severity of low temperature stress, oxidative stress and the stress of herbivory. What is more, the relative percentage growth enhancement produced by an increase in the air’s CO2 content is often greater when comparing plants growing under stressful and resource-limited conditions than when growing conditions are ideal.
Altogether, with the plant productivity gains that result from the aerial fertilization effect of the ongoing rise in atmospheric CO2, plus its transpiration-reducing effect that boosts plant water use efficiency along with its stress-alleviating effect that lessens the negative growth impacts of resource limitations and environmental constraints, the world’s vegetation possesses an ideal mix of abilities to reap a tremendous benefit in the years and decades to come. And based on a multitude of observations, the future is now. As evidence from around the globe indicates, the terrestrial biosphere is presently experiencing a great planetary surge in growth, likely due in large measure to the approximate 40 percent increase in atmospheric CO2 that has occurred since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution.
Real-world evidence of such is apparent in the long-term observation of forests. Tree growth at locations all around the globe over the past two centuries, for example, reveals trends that are not consistent with the usual climatic variables attributable to growth stimulation, such as temperature or precipitation. In these instances, researchers acknowledge the steady influence of rising atmospheric CO2 concentrations on growth trends, which trends are often manifested as increases in both the density and aerial coverage of woody species.
Other evidence of a CO2-induced stimulation of vegetation in recent years is seen in grassland and desert ecosystems, as well as for the world as a whole. With respect to all land plants, for example, satellite-based studies reveal net terrestrial primary productivity has increased by six to 13 percent since the 1980s. Other research shows the annual global carbon uptake has doubled from 2.4 ± 0.8 billion tons in 1960 to 5.0 ± 0.9 billion tons in 2010. What makes these observations appear even more astonishing, however, is the fact that they occurred in spite of the many recorded assaults of both man and nature on planetary vegetation over this time period, including fires, disease, pest outbreaks, deforestation and climatic changes in temperature and precipitation. That the biosphere experienced any productivity improvement, let alone a doubling, is truly amazing; and it demonstrates, in part, the powerful impact atmospheric CO2 enrichment is exerting on global vegetation.
As a society, it is high time for us to recognize and embrace the truth. Contrary to misguided assertions, political correctness and government edicts, carbon dioxide is not a pollutant. It’s a colorless, odorless, tasteless atmospheric gas that is essential to nearly all life on earth. Please remember that, especially the next time you are quizzed about its virtues.

Friday, September 26, 2014

Provinces and assistancies, Jesuits World Order 10 Kingdoms

Western Europe Assistancy Western Europe Assistancy Western Europe Assistancy Western Europe Assistancy Africa Assistancy Africa Assistancy Western Europe Assistancy South Europe Assistancy South Europe Assistancy South Europe Assistancy U.S.A. Assistancy U.S.A. Assistancy  North Latin America Assistancy South Latin America Assistancy East Europe Assistancy Central Europe Assistancy West Europe Assistancy East Asia Assistancy South Asia Assistancy
Jesuit communities and apostolic works are organized by 'provinces' which belong to one of ten 'assistancies' or 10 Kingdoms around the world. Click on the map of the world to see a list of all the real world government ruled by the Holy Roman Empire, governed by their Jesuit Order. They divided the world by provinces that belong to the assistancy you have selected; you will find the addresses of the administrative offices of each one as well as links to its web site. The countries names that you know them are for taxes collection and population control of divide and conquer purposes only.

How they govern the world via puppets
These are the real World power structure.
The three most powerful men in the world are Jesuit priests.  The order of their power is as follows:  First, “the Black Pope” and Jesuit Superior General; secondly, former Black Pope and Jesuit Superior General; and lastly, “the White Pope” and Vicar of Christ/Vicar of Horus Pope. The current  Pope is the first pope who is openly a member of the military order of the Society of Jesus. These arch criminals under bloody oaths rule the world on behalf of Satan, “the god of this world” (II Corinthians 4:4).

The world 10 Kingdoms
And the ten horns which thou sawest are ten kings, which have received no kingdom as yet but receive power as kings one hour with the beast. These have one mind, and shall give their power and strength unto the beast.

What this means is these three men rule all the governments of the nations through the Black Pope’s perfected international intelligence community directed by the Jesuits from Rome through London and Washington, D.C.  All central banks are ruled by the agents of these men.  All the armies of the most powerful nations (US, Russia, China, Germany, etc.) are ruled by these men.  All the secret societies and the Committee 300 are ruled by these men.  All mafia families conducting every sort of organized crime are ruled by these men.  All entertainment and news outlets are ruled by these men.  There is nothing outside of their immediate temporal power, i.e., the power ruling the governments of all nations today.


Jesuits Committee of 300

Jesuits Committee of mainstream Media Control

The Knights controlled Bilderberg Group, you think you have freedom of Choice, think again.


The Honourable Society of Lincoln's Inn  :

The Honourable Society of the Inner Temple  :

The Honourable Society of the Middle Temple  :

The Honourable Society of Gray's Inn :

Once a country is conquered, the first paperwork approved by these institutions is that conquered country Constitution. Then the implementation and enforcement of the Canon Law.

Few famous students:

Gandhi, Mohandas Karamchand (1869-1948)
Adm IT 1888; call 1891; disbarred 1922; reinstated 1988
Architect of Indian independence from the Priory of Sion slavery ( The Priory of Sion clans claim they descended from a marriage of Jesus with Mary Magdalene.) Gandhi was subservient to the Jesuit Order to reinstate sovereign India. The US, China, Japan, and any Sovereign proclaimed countries were and still is below the Sovereign Vatican, except the countries in light-grey colored map above. But situation is changing quickly, Libya is been conquered, Syria is on its way, followed by Iran and the surroundings.

Rhodes, Cecil John
ADM IT 1876
Educational philanthropist, the English imperialist, financier, and mining magnate Cecil John Rhodes (1853-1902) founded and controlled the British South Africa Company, which acquired Rhodesia and Zambia as British territories. He founded the Rhodes scholarships.

Rahman, Tunku Abdul (1895-1960)
Adm IT 1925; Call 1928; 
1st King of Malaysia.

Nehru, Jawaharlal (1889-1964)
Adm IT 1909; call 1912
First Prime Minister of India

Phillippo, Sir George (1833-1914)
Adm IT 1859; Call 1862
Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Hong Kong 1882-1888

Yong Pung How, (1926-)
Adm IT 1946; call 1951
Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Singapore (1990-2006)