Derek Acorah- "Maddie's Dead!"

The TV celebrity medium Derek Acorah created a stir back in 2012 when The Sun published an article entitled: TV Psychic's sick "Maddie's Dead" Claim. Within Acorah was quoted as saying: "I know her parents are convinced Maddie is alive and I’m really sorry, but the little one has been over in the spirit world for some time. I don’t think she’ll be there long before she reincarnates. When children pass over who haven’t had full lives I believe they choose the time to come back in the same form again, as another little girl." The rest of the press quickly picked up on The Sun's scoop and there were many other similarly outraged responses from the media. Derek Acorah had planned a trip to Praia da Luz in Portugal where Madeleine was reported missing in 2007; he intended to use his paranormal skills to try and find out where she is. However, after this message from his spirit guide "Sam" he cancelled the project. Madeleine's parents Kate and Gerry McCann responded by saying they were "Sickened!... This character Derek Acorah is nothing but a self-publicist... It’s incredibly distasteful and insensitive... We believe our daughter is alive and the Metropolitan Police are currently pursuing an investigation to that effect." Acorah immediately accused The Sun of misquoting him, that he had had a telephone conversation with a journalist in order to discuss Acorah's upcoming tour of Ireland. The man had asked Acorah about his belief in reincarnation, the subject of Madeleine McCann had come up and the reporter had "put things together by association...", see: http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-is-dead-derek-acorah-833385. If "Sam" really had Derek's best interests at heart he might have warned his channel never to talk to tabloid newspapers.

As regular HPANWO-readers know, I have an open mind when it comes to mediums and psychic powers; I often attend spiritualist churches, for example see: http://hpanwo-voice.blogspot.co.uk/2015/01/alex-malarkey-ctcs.html and search "spiritualism" or "psychic". I'm not turning Skeptic when I say that I doubt that Derek Acorah is a real psychic; or at least if he is then his powers don't always work and so he often cheats, using the tried and tested methods that many people claiming to be mediums employ, see: http://hpanwo.blogspot.co.uk/2008/08/psychic-mafia-by-m-lamar-keene.html. Acorah became well known as the medium on the TV series Most Haunted and in one episode he appeared to go into a trance and was possessed by the spirit of a South African prison warder called Kreed Kafer. It turned out that Kreed Kafer never existed. He was fabricated by Skeptics on the team who fed it to Acorah as disinformation; "kreed kafer" is an anagram of "Derek faker". I don't know if Derek Acorah is genuinely psychic or not; I know that David Icke speaks fondly of him and that Acorah predicted accurately the meeting of him and his wife Pamela, now estranged. That's really not the point. What's significant here is that Acorah was announcing the death of Madeleine McCann. Since he said those words a lot of new information has been uncovered by researchers into the case, for example see: http://hpanwo-voice.blogspot.co.uk/2014/08/richplanet-live-in-london.html. It now appears very likely that Madeleine McCann is dead, and that she died back in May 2007 shortly before she was reported as missing by her mother and father. Why Madeleine's parents and their friends have lied about this and covered up the little girl's death, I don't know; nobody does. However it's pretty clear that for some reason the authorities want to maintain the illusion that Madeleine is not dead and is just missing. In the original article in The Sun, now no longer in the public domain, there are the following sensationalist related links: 3 New Clues to Maddie... Maddie Lookalike Driver in Cop Quiz... Madeleine McCann Holiday Promo is "Unforgivable". That newspaper is no doubt a part of the drive to maintain the "Find Maddy now!" meme. The narrative of Madeleine being alive and the quest to find her is constantly kept ticking along. I think it's unlikely that Derek Acorah really did contact the spirit of the little girl; but whether he did or he didn't, his input is an effort to derail that essential narrative. This is why I think he was treated so badly by Rupert Murdoch's propaganda publications.

Vaccinate... or Else!

Australia has always given me the impression of an advanced streak of authoritarianism; only yesterday I was describing how they prosecute people for abstaining in elections, see: http://hpanwo-voice.blogspot.co.uk/2015/04/not-voting-reply-to-thomas-g-clark.html. When I visited the country myself a few years ago I noticed there were generally far more police around on the streets than in Britain. A few days ago the prime minister announced that any parent who refused to give their child the full schedule of vaccinations would have their benefits cut. At the moment up to ten percent of Australian parents decline vaccines because of their fears about its health risks; I share their concerns, see background articles at the bottom. I gave my own daughter the MMR jab in the mid 90's, but if I'd known then what I know now I would definitely not have done so. Abbott has spoken at a press conference where he states that vaccination in Australia is still not compulsory. This is very devious of him and an insult to our intelligence; he knows as well as most other people that for millions of families on low or even moderate income, threats to withdraw benefits as punishment for non-compliance is in effect an act of duress, see: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-32273992. I think I can guess where this all started. There's a very noisy character doing the rounds called Dr Paul Offit, see: http://paul-offit.com/, who has no qualms about wielding the law as a weapon to make people vaccinate themselves and their children. This divides him from some of his fellow medical Skeptics; others, like Dr Ben Goldacre, think it would be counterproductive to coerce people to vaccinate against their will and simply recommends scientific education. Offit does not agree and is unequivocally in favour of outright brute force. He's an American and in the United States the legal position on forced vaccination varies depending on which of the states you live in; Offit has petitioned state legislatures to pass acts of obligation on vaccines and also would like to see the US federal government wade in and enforce vaccination nationwide. As I said Offit is American, but he also seems to be very keen to poke his nose into the affairs of other countries, including the United Kingdom, see: http://hpanwo-voice.blogspot.co.uk/2014/01/benefit-cuts-for-mmr-dodgers.html. I would not be surprised if this new move in Australia was inspired by Offit's lobbying. The rise of dependency on the state for a living has made such actions far easier. No laws of literal enforcement need to be passed, just these "no jab no pay" policies. I wonder why it is that if vaccines "are safe!" then why is it necessary to bludgeon people into taking them this way? It's a very contemptuous and condescending way to treat people. Let us have an open and honest debate on the subject and then we can make up our own minds. We are thinking human beings, are we not?... But of course, they won't do that. They can't because they know that these concerns are real and justified. If the truth ever came out a multi-billion dollar industry would crash and a covert biological weapons delivery protocol would be exposed. This is why they crucified Dr Andrew Wakefield, or "Andrew Wakefield" as they insist on calling him. They had to make an example of him to other healthcare professionals who may be considering apostasy.

See here for background: http://hpanwo-voice.blogspot.co.uk/2014/02/us-and-uk-governments-vaccine-lies.html.

And: http://hpanwo.blogspot.co.uk/2009/04/emergency-swine-flu-meeting-with-ian.html.

And: http://hpanwo-tv.blogspot.co.uk/2015/01/real-zombies-2015.html.

And: http://hpanwo-voice.blogspot.co.uk/2009/11/jabbers.html.

Not Voting?- a reply to Thomas G Clark

A friend of mine on Facebook made me aware of an article that he thought would interest me (as traditional a beginning to stories as "once upon a time") because it is an indirect response to one I myself wrote two days ago, although I don't know if the individual in question ever read mine, see: http://hpanwo-voice.blogspot.co.uk/2015/04/electioneering.html. Unfortunately, during this month the topic of the election is going to be impossible to avoid. The article is by a man called Thomas G Clark and he calls his blog Another Angry Voice; he describes it as: "Economics, philosophy, politics and other stuff from an independent Yorkshire blogger." The post in question is entitled "Why not voting is such a pitifully ineffective form of 'protest'.", see: http://anotherangryvoice.blogspot.co.uk/2015/04/not-voting-pitifully-ineffective-protest.html. Mr Clark begins with a rather cynical judgement of his commenters which shows that his website lives up to its name: "I strongly believe in freedom of speech so I never delete comments from my Facebook page or politics blog simply because I disagree with them, so this article is intended as a riposte to those who take advantage of my anti-censorship stance to use my work as a platform to promote their 'just stop voting' agenda... The fact that people hijack my work to promote their ridiculous 'just stop voting' agenda is bad!" Does this mean that anybody who questions him is "promoting an agenda"? Maybe, Thomas, they're just expressing an opinion in reply to your own, as I am doing.

The first reason Mr Clark tables is that boycotting an election is indistinguishable from apathy. He says: "If the opponent of the political status quo does exactly the same form of non-action as the hopelessly apathetic fool who doesn't care a jot about who rules over their lives or how the political system is structured, then how is it even possible to tell how many of those non-votes are ill-conceived protests and how many are manifestations of sheer apathy?" This is an irrelevant point because who is sorting out one from the other? It matters only to the government; and everybody I know who is refusing to vote is hardly on a mission to gain governmental approval. Boycotting elections is not about building some kind of numerical majority; it's about refusing to participate in a fraudulent practice that gives credibility to a system that deserves none. This is what I tried to explain to my UKIP-voting friends, see the link to my Electioneering article above. Mr Clark goes on: "The 'just stop voting' advocate will often try to claim that if enough of us stopped voting then the election results would become illegitimate through lack of participation. Without explaining the mechanism by which the Westminster establishment parties would be removed from power after a mass non-vote..." This is not the objective of the non-voters I discuss this issue with. We're not on a quest to bring down the system through not voting; we know the rules of an election have no lower limits on turnout figures. This is why I like anti-political movements like "NOTA", see: http://notavote.co.uk/. I've not looked at the comments on his blog or Facebook page, so maybe the people he's referring to are of a completely different tendency to those I'm familiar with. The point he made inevitably leads to the question of who will carry on voting in place of those who don't. If a large percentage of the population refuse to vote, says Mr Clark, it merely concentrates political power in fewer hands, of those who do. He says: "If 99.2% of us stopped voting, then it's absolutely clear that the 0.8% of us who are actually members of the three Westminster establishment parties would continue voting for themselves... If the majority of people who oppose the system choose to not vote, those who support the system will be at an obvious electoral advantage... it's obvious that they (non-voters) are essentially condemning the rest of us to perpetual Westminster establishment rule." In that case I wonder how he intends to introduce a party into Westminster that truly stands for non-establishment rule. History, including British history, is replete with examples of anti-establishment firebrands who desperately want to change the world by following the beaten tracks of the political landscape, and failing. Why? Because those tracks are specifically built to maintain the existing order. Remember the Labour Party was founded by trade unionists who sincerely cared about the wellbeing of the British working classes. Miliband's modern "new Labour" would make those early pioneers gasp in dismay; indeed sadly one of them lived long enough to witness Labour's demise, see: http://hpanwo-voice.blogspot.co.uk/2014/03/tony-benn-dies.html. The saddest element to this impasse is that the corruption is an inward one too. The establishment system doesn't forbid good men from joining it; in fact it invites them warmly in... and then it transforms them into bad men. Those who successfully resist are expelled.

Mr Clark's next gripe is: "Not voting is also a very good way of ensuring that unpopular extremists manage to get into power. A good example of this is the way that UKIP managed to become the biggest UK party in the European parliament after winning just 9% of the eligible vote." Well, I wouldn't describe UKIP as either unpopular or extremist. A more apposite example, from Mr Clark's point of view, might be that of the 2002 French Presidential elections in which a low turnout in the first round led to the far right Front National candidate Jean-Marie le Pen being favourite to win against a single rival. Many leftists who had not bothered to vote in the first round famously went to the polls and voted for the conservative Jacques Chirac wearing a symbolic handkerchief over their face to "protect me from ze stench as I save ze country from fascism!" However the definition of "extremist" is debatable. I personally consider it "extremist" to drop bombs on people just so an oil company can drive a pipeline through their village. I find it "extremist" to force young people out of work into slavery, doing work for no money, see: http://hpanwo-voice.blogspot.co.uk/2015/02/cameron-pushes-workfare.html. I find it "extremist" to turn a blind eye to the evil crimes of the rich and famous, to the brutality of Zionist thugs in the Middle East and to bankers with more money than God squeezing yet more from the people. All the "mainstream centrist moderate" political parties in this country have done all those things; and there's no reason to think they're going to stop now. "If we despise the current political system, then surely it is better to find a political party that is proposing to change the system, than to simply abstain and actually increase the chances that things will stay pretty much exactly as they are." Mr Clark is breathtakingly naive here. I assumed Yorkshiremen were more worldly wise, taking into account that the recent history of Yorkshire has been shaped by the destruction of its coal mines and traditional heavy industries. For the reasons I have explained, we're never going vote in a government that will really propose change. Mr Clark ends with: "Whether you want to oppose the Westminster establishment... or oppose the political system... by submitting a spoiled ballot paper, it's really important that you make sure that you are registered to vote... to promote a form of protest that is completely indistinguishable from complete apathy beneath the work of someone who is passionate about political reform is deeply disrespectful." This sounds to me like incitement to support compulsory voting, a system some countries have including Australia. Every citizen is required by law to enter a polling station and return a ballot or face prosecution. This draconian method of increasing electoral turnout has a nasty sting in its tail. It would mean that the "database state" would have to become a reality; every person registered and monitored by the system, see: http://hpanwo-voice.blogspot.co.uk/2014/12/young-people-and-1984.html. If this is what Mr Clark is insinuating then I humbly suggest that he reconsiders, seeing as he sites one of his influences as George Orwell, see: http://anotherangryvoice.blogspot.co.uk/p/about-author.html. I am one of these people who annoy Mr Clark so much, somebody who advises people not to vote in the upcoming general election. I advise this because democracy is a con. If we could change things by voting they wouldn't let us do it. "The men in grey suits" decide everything and democracy is nothing more than our hard-won right to put a cross on a piece of paper every few years and choose our government's public relations officer. Real change, a genuinely better world, will only come about when the people accept that fact and act on it. In the meantime nothing can be achieved by rising to their bait and playing their game.

See here for more details: http://hpanwo-voice.blogspot.co.uk/2015/03/vote-for-deek-jackson.html.

And: http://hpanwo-voice.blogspot.co.uk/2015/01/politicians-new-year-message.html.

Crashed UFO in Antarctica?

It's only a few weeks since Third Phase of the Moon reported on a new "Roswell", a supposed UFO crash in the wilds of Canada. News on that event has now dried up, see: http://hpanwo-voice.blogspot.co.uk/2015/02/new-roswell-in-canada.html. However more news has just emerged of another similar case in an even more remote and inaccessible location, Antarctica. The source for this information is actually Google Earth. I have followed the instructions on Third Phase and have verified the basic information on the broadcast. Antarctica is a continent bigger than Europe that is almost entirely covered in ice and snow; this is because it's located in the south polar region of the Earth so it's very cold there. The temperature rarely rises above freezing and can plummet to minus eighty. Nobody lives there and there are no large land fauna except penguins. Nevertheless a few thousand people work there at various scientific research stations dotted around the continent. Over half of them are based at McMurdo Station, a large self-contained American settlement on the coast of an island on the Ross Sea, which is frozen over for most of the year. The base can be found on Google Earth in the search box and at grid reference: 77°51′S 166°40′E, and there are even a few stretches of Street views. Using the Google Earth scale for all dimensions, a couple of miles along the coast from McMurdo Station is Scott Base, a smaller settlement run by New Zealand. The location of interest lies about two miles northeast of Scott Base on the Ross Ice Shelf to the east of the island. We see a structure of hexagonal shape lying at the end of a furrow of snow about three hundred feet long, judging by the map scale. The artefact is roughly thirty to forty feet across and white in colour. A hundred yards or so to the east stand a row of oblong objects. These are evenly spaced about a hundred feet apart and are slightly bigger than the hexagonal structure. These four objects have been described as "tanks" because they have a main body with a superstructure on top which could be a gun turret. There are some snowdrifts around them and no tracks behind them, indicating they've parked been there for some time. These structures are visible in the second highest to minimum degree of magnification; the highest zoom-in shows nothing but a plain of empty ice and snow. This indicates that the two photos were taken at different times and that the five objects are temporary and have either recently arrived, or recently been removed. There are some photos of the area, but they're taken a few miles away and all of them point north towards the volcano at the centre of the island, Mount Erebus. The programme presenters compare the possible crash site to the scene in the 1951 film The Day the Earth Stood Still in which a flying saucer lands and a military taskforce surrounds it in case the aliens inside are hostile, see: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eITSTWfs6n4.

The Third Phase presenters speculate a lot during the programme. They accuse Google of covering up the information; however I'm writing this two days after their video was uploaded and the image in question is still available. A friend of mine sent me the screen shots above in which you can see more details. If the four rectangular objects are tanks then they're of a make not in common use in any of the militaries of the world. The biggest tank ever built is the Panzer VIII Maus, but only two were ever constructed, both in 1944 by Nazi Germany, and the only one still in existence is in a museum. It was thirty-three feet long, definitely much smaller than these objects. Also no modern tank has matched the size of the Panzer VIII Maus. So maybe they're something else. It's too soon to say for sure. We don't know what any of these objects are and there's not enough information to be sure. The United States Antarctic Programme has a website and there is no suspicious activity on it that I can see. It includes live webcams of McMurdo Station and the two other American bases on Antarctica and they appear to be working normally, see: http://www.usap.gov/videoclipsandmaps/mcmWebCam.cfm. I'm keeping an eye on this webcam for any unusual activity. If we see it suddenly go down, that might be an indicator that something is going on at the base that the authorities don't want us to know about. We need more information about this anomaly before making statements about whether this is a real UFO crash-retrieval. I am in contact with a person who works at McMurdo Station, although I've not heard from him for a while and don't know if he's there right now. He's American and might have gone home to the USA on leave. However he knows me because he listens to HPANWO Radio (which means I have listeners on every continent of the Earth now!), so I'll ask him if he knows anything about it. If anybody else reading this has friends or family currently in Antarctica please get in touch with them and see if they know anything about this alleged UFO. I'm not turning Skeptic on you; I do take the possibility of an "Antarctic Roswell" very seriously. This revelation by Third Phase may well be a real one. The frozen continent at the bottom of the world is indeed the home of many secrets and cover-ups, for example, see: http://hpanwo.blogspot.co.uk/2008/07/jack-of-antarctic.html. There are also said to have been nuclear bomb tests there and activities relating to esoteric energy and weapons systems. There are reports of paranormal activity in Antarctica too, including Bigfoot-like creatures. The Third Phase of the Moon programme linked above also examines some curious formations on the top of a hill overlooking McMurdo Station. So it wouldn't surprise me if there had indeed been a UFO crash retrieval there. Maybe pictures of this secret incident were accidentally captured and uploaded to Google Earth. This is interesting information but it needs to be explored in more detail so we know exactly what's going on here. I have a strong feeling that 2015 will be the year of ET Disclosure... if such a thing is possible, see background links below. If Disclosure is about to happen then the solution to this mystery might come sooner than many people might expect. It could even be the long sought after "trigger event".

See here for background: http://hpanwo-tv.blogspot.co.uk/2015/04/ufo-disclosure-2015-first-three-months.html.

And: http://hpanwo-tv.blogspot.co.uk/2015/02/energy-politics-and-ufos-2015.html.

And: http://hpanwo-voice.blogspot.co.uk/2015/02/the-roswell-slides-to-be-revealed.html.

Electioneering

I will not be voting in the upcoming UK general election. As regular HPANWO-readers will know, I believe democracy is a con. Democracy is one of the biggest buzz-words in the English language; it is loaded down like no other with emotional, cultural and political baggage. Wars have been fought over democracy which have cost the lives of millions. Some people will start weeping at the very mention of the word. The quest for democracy has produced some of the most dramatic tales in history, from the Chartists to the Suffragettes to Mandela. Yet most democratic countries, even very old democracies, are suffering from a malaise. Democratic governments have a major credibility problem in their relationship with their citizens; some political leaders even have approval ratings in single figures. Cynicism is endemic and electoral turnout is low. Citizens also will vote often for negative reasons instead of positive; they’ll vote for somebody they don’t like in order to keep somebody they like even less out of office, rather than to try and elect somebody they do like. Democratic countries today are ruled by some of the most loathsome people imaginable; cruel, cowardly, weak, gutless, heartless, stupid, selfish and deceitful. Despite the fact that nominally we can “choose our leaders”, these kinds of people always rise to the top and nobody seems to know why, let alone how to stop them. This malaise is growing. For a long time in Britain, certainly during my entire lifetime, elections have consisted of a simple port and starboard watch between two political parties, Labour and Conservative, just swapping office every few years. The principle third party has been various splinter cells of the old Liberal Party; for the last decade or two it has been called the Liberal Democrats. It traditionally gets about fifteen percent of the vote and has a dozen or so Parliamentary seats. However this has now changed. In the 2010 election, for the first time in many years, neither main party achieved an electoral majority and so we had a "hung parliament"; therefore the Tories proposed an alliance with the Lib Dems and they formed a coalition government. The upcoming election this year will therefore be more interesting... or at least slightly less boring... than the previous ones. None of the Lib-Lab-Con triumvirate will be in government on their own after the election, or in the same combination that they were before. So when the BBC held a live TV debate, there were a few extra faces on the panel; Natalie Bennett of the Green Party, Nigel Farage of UKIP, Nicola "big fish" Sturgeon, first minister of Scotland and leader of the SNP and Leanne "Bach" Wood of Plaid Cymru, see: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Sv2AOQBd_s. The Ulster Unionists, socialists and others have demanded to know why they were not invited; which shows how chaotic the situation is. It seems that nobody can predict what will happen on May the 7th... at least nobody willing to comment in public. This does not mean that the "men in grey suits" have neglected to make arrangements for who will be living at Number Ten on May the 8th, just that it's not as obvious as usual, and there is more potential for slip-ups in their plot. The media is being as unprofessional as always. I've been disgusted at the way the Greens' Natalie Bennett and Caroline Lucas have been treated during interviews; the host keeps interrupting and baiting them, see: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=32aqb167NkE. I'm not a Green Party supporter, but some of their ideas are genuinely progressive, like Basic Income, see: http://hpanwo.blogspot.co.uk/2008/05/basic-income.html. Obviously these have to be shut down. I'm in two minds over UKIP too, see: http://hpanwo-voice.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/is-ukip-on-our-side.html.

There's been a lot of talk lately about Labour forming a coalition with the Scottish National Party. This would be a turn up for the books because Scotland would have jurisdiction over what is decided in Westminster for the first time since the reign of King James I. We'd then have Ed Miliband, the Fabian Society boy wonder, as prime minister. His deputy would be Nicola Sturgeon or Bilderberg Group attendee Alex Salmond. The Conservative defence secretary made waves a few days ago claiming that Miliband would offer the SNP a deal by axing Trident; the Scottish nationalists are totally opposed to Trident (so am I, see: http://hpanwo-voice.blogspot.co.uk/2013/07/replacing-trident.html). Ed "Millipede" has denied this and claimed: "National security is too valuable to play politics with!", see: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-32229759. However, I have a feeling Labour will end up offering the SNP a bargaining chip; but it won't be Trident, it will be another independence referendum, see: http://hpanwo-tv.blogspot.co.uk/2014/09/people-of-scotland-please-vote-no-i.html. Sturgeon and Salmond will hang their hopes on a "YES" vote this time and then get rid of Trident from Scotland anyway. However the last referendum was rigged, see: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LbJif7vISQg. What's to prevent that happening again? Remember UK elections are not independently monitored, unlike those in new and fragile democracies. We never think that electoral fraud could happen here, but it can and it does.

Whatever happens at the general election next month, nothing fundamental or important will change. Organized child abuse will still continue, bankers will not stop squeezing the nation dry, the forests will continue to be felled and genetically modified food will still be stocked, unlabelled, on supermarket shelves. I had a rather frustrating telephone conversation a few weeks ago with some friends of mine who have decided to vote UKIP because they so badly wanted Britain to get out of the European Union. I also think our country should exit the EU, immediately and completely. However I'm not going to vote for what looks to me like a controlled populist front. Farage offers a referendum on the EU when we should not be able to vote on it at all. This is because the UK's entry into the EU was an act of treason. You can't have a referendum on treason. You just tear up the membership papers and jail those responsible. One of my friends asked me: "Who are you going to vote for then?" and I replied "Nobody". He then said: "If you don't vote then you've got no right to an opinion." I was dumbfounded. This is coming from a man who has read three David Icke books and regularly attends conspiratorial conferences like Probe and Alternative View. I asked him: "So let's suppose UKIP win the general election and Nigel Farage becomes Prime Minister; what do you think will happen? Do you really think that the 'Men in Grey Suits' will shrug and say: 'OK, well that's our trick rumbled then. We'd better bow to the will of the people'.?" He evaded the question. Luckily most other people in the Conspirasphere are more clued up than my friend. If we could change things by voting they wouldn't let us do it. Indeed the MP Chris Mullin has written a fictional political novel called A Very British Coup which explains this concept. It was adapted into a TV miniseries, see: http://www.channel4.com/programmes/a-very-british-coup/on-demand/1867-001. No genuine improvement will come into our lives until this reality is exposed and dealt with. "The men in grey suits" decide everything and democracy is nothing more than our hard-won right to put a cross on a piece of paper every few years and choose our government's public relations officer.

See here for more details: http://hpanwo-voice.blogspot.co.uk/2015/03/vote-for-deek-jackson.html.

And: http://hpanwo-voice.blogspot.co.uk/2015/01/politicians-new-year-message.html.

Zombie Tube Trick

I've been writing a lot lately about incidents which on the surface appear to be innocent pranks, but might have a darkly serious undertone to them. I've also been examining the subject of zombies and how they are being portrayed as real or semi-real in society; see background links at the bottom. These questions have arisen recently in a Brazilian reality TV show. The programme is of the "hidden camera" variety very similar to Trigger Happy TV or Beadle's About, but is far more extreme. The intention is to play practical jokes on unknowing members of the public for the amusement of the viewer. A recent episode features a woman who is travelling on an underground train. She is sitting in the carriage alone when it pulls into a station and the lights flicker. Noises from the movie Jacob's Ladder are added to the soundtrack for macabre effect. From the outset the passenger senses that something is amiss; she stands up and crosses herself, indicating that she is of a generally nervous disposition. The doors do not slide open as they should when the train is at a station. The passenger hammers on the doors saying: "Open up! I want to get out." The driver then announces on the tannoy that the train is suffering some technical problems and apologizes for the inconvenience. He assures everybody that they'll be fixed shortly... but then suddenly he pauses and begins crying out: "What the...!?... Get out!... Help me!" The passenger looks alarmed. The lights switch off completely and when they come back on, to her horror the passenger sees a group of Romeroesque zombies pressed up against the windows on the platform side. They are looking at her ravenously and pushing their hands through the ventilation gaps. The passenger screams in terror and desperately tries to force the doors on the opposite side of the carriage. She becomes completely hysterical with panic. She kneels down and prays desperately, weeping with fear. As she does so we see that under the cover of darkness when the lights were out, one of the zombies has managed to enter the cabin and it crawls obscenely towards her. As it reaches out to grab her she jumps up and runs to the far end of the carriage. At that moment the doors open and the zombies crowd in, but a second door is left unguarded and the passenger dashes out of it to safety. The jape is then repeated with several other people, see: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5IOSVhfG79U.

I wondered if this scenario could all be staged and the victims are just actresses pretending to be frightened. I hope that's the case; however they look genuine to me. If this is a real set-up then the programme's producers should feel ashamed of themselves. I don't find it entertaining to see people truly thinking that their last moment on Earth has come, and that their demise will be one of being devoured alive by the carnivorous undead. This experience could have left her mentally scarred for life. Not just mentally either; she might have had a heart attack and died. What if she'd been armed? In Brazil gun control is more stringent than in the USA, but far weaker than in the UK; many people still carry firearms for self-defence. In that situation she'd be justified in shooting the "zombies" which could result in the death of the actors. Then again she might consider shooting herself to end it all before having to endure the agony of being dismembered and eaten; one of the characters in George A Romero's Day of the Dead does this. However there's another issue which is relevant whether the scene was real or not. Is the TV programme being used as a cultural experiment? The powers-that-were are trying to engineer our minds to become used to the presence of zombies, whether this symbolizes a sub-social underclass, victims of disease or a transhumanist golem; see background links below. The manipulators will be analyzing that scene frame-by-frame to assess that poor woman's reaction to the attempted zombie assault. They will also be sizing up the response of viewers, which is the reason for articles like this, see: http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/cruelest-prank-ever-woman-left-5435850; notice the social media comments section and opinion poll? Of course this blog post will be one of the reactions they'll be studying too, in which case I hope they realize that their scheme will fail because people like me are on to them! They will not have their zombie apocalypse, whatever that means in practical reality.

See here for background: http://hpanwo-voice.blogspot.co.uk/2015/03/islamification-in-asda.html.

And: http://hpanwo-voice.blogspot.co.uk/2015/04/suppressed-evidence-of-giants.html.

And: http://hpanwo-tv.blogspot.co.uk/2015/01/real-zombies-2015.html.

Suppressed Evidence of Giants?

Every so often a video or picture appears online of an enormous human skeleton, usually being excavated from the ground. As with UFO and ghost photos, most of these are obviously faked and sometimes, because of the quality and availability of modern special effects technology, it's hard to know which is which. However credible stories occasionally emerge from the melee which do indeed report findings of very ancient human remains of extraordinary size; here's one I covered previously: http://hpanwo-voice.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/giants-found-in-iraq.html. Sometimes humans do grow to heights way above the average of 5"7 for males, 5"4 for females. Robert P Wadlow of Alton, Illinois USA (1918 - 1940) peaked out at an inch below nine feet tall. This makes him the tallest confirmed human who has ever lived. He had to have clothes, furniture and utensils custom made for him. However the bodies in the graves found by Dr Ali in Iraq were all of people who would have stood at least a foot taller than Wadlow; found nearby were utensils of a comparable size dated to the same time period as the graves.

When an article began circulating that a number of giant skeletons had been destroyed I didn't immediately jump on it and declare it as real. The Smithsonian Institution is one of the largest academic organizations in the world. Based in the United States of America it runs a large number of museums, universities and research centres. According to the article it had been ordered by the US Supreme Court to reveal documents relating to the deliberate destruction of the oversized human skeletons in the early 20th century, see: http://worldnewsdailyreport.com/smithsonian-admits-to-destruction-of-thousands-of-giant-human-skeletons-in-early-1900s/. However, as you can see, there is no source sited for this information, and Googling the subject brought up no further documentation; therefore I concluded that it was almost certainly a false story. It turns out that the World Daily News Report is a satirical hoax website, rather like "BFNN", see: http://hpanwo-voice.blogspot.co.uk/2015/03/islamification-in-asda.html. The name "James Churward" is probably a corruption of Col. James Churchward, the real alternative archaeologist who studied the idea of the lost continent of Mu. However, as with the Muslim Asda story, I wonder if there is a sinister underlying objective related to it, not least because of the photograph it uses as an illustration. Despite this story being a joke, according to many researchers archaeological data has been eliminated before in order to preserve the official narrative. When the Hypogeum on Malta was uncovered it was full of human bones, indicating that it had been some kind of charnel house. Thousands of individuals had been interred there. However nearly all those bones have "been mislaid" and only six skulls remain. The same is reported by Michael Cremo and Richard L Thompson in their epic book Forbidden Archaeology, see: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Forbidden-Archeology-Hidden-History-Human/dp/0892132949. According to them, such scientific fraud is carried out routinely and dates back to the dawn of science in order to maintain a false conventional vision of the past. The photo above is of some skulls found in a cave in Nevada USA. As you can see somebody has placed a silver coin, probably a US dollar, in the frame to provide a rough scale and these skulls are huge. They're from anatomically normal human heads apart from their enormous size. If the rest of their bodies are on the same relative human dimensions then these "people" would have stood over twelve feet high. The local Paiute Indians tell folk tales about a time in the past when giants roamed the local area. They were very fierce and if they captured humans they would kill and eat them. Is this mythology actually based on real events handed down from past generations? In the West we all know of the many legends of giants, from Homer's Cyclops to the bible which states: There were giants on the Earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God saw that the daughters of men were fair and took them as wives, and they gave them many heirs. These became mighty men of renown. (Gen. 6:4). The bible also describes the giant warrior Goliath who was killed by the young king David with a slingshot. Goliath was said to be 9"9 tall, so he would have stood ten inches over Robert P Wadlow. (1 Sam. ch 17) Therefore, even if the motive of World Daily News Report is nothing more than mischievous fun, they have still blundered into a genuine and very serious controversy. I think it's perfectly possible that in the past there were races of supersized humanoid beings, possibly emerging out of a union with extraterrestrial life. But what if it's not just the past we're talking about here? For a long time now Nexus magazine has been promoting the book Solomon Islands Mysteries: Accounts of Giants and UFO's in the Solomon Islands by Marius Boirayon, see: http://www.amazon.com/Solomon-Islands-Mysteries-Accounts-Giants/dp/1935487043. This does not only describe legends of giants in the past, but contemporary encounter reports. There are a lot of unanswered questions when it comes to this subject and the people have a right to know the answers. Therefore if any scholar is withholding evidence about this issue then they are doing terrible harm and injustice; I would ask them to come forward.