The Clone Conspiracy: Royal and Presidential Clones

Originally posted by someotherguy

...all of these clones of previous leaders really makes me think that personas are being recycled to give the new inhabitant clone of a certain post or position some measure of legitimacy in the public eye. I think there may be some sort of recognition that is being triggered in the collective unconscious.

Hi Someotherguy,


Would you care to explain what you mean by "the new inhabitant clone" because the way I read it this could appear to imply that Clones are destined to be our planet's "new inhabitants" either joining us in the long term, mixing with us to remove human emotions from our offspring, or even to replace us as the future earthlings? In this light here is a quote from the Phoenix Express Vol. VIII, No. 6 & 7, p. 12:


"The world is inhabited by reproductions of programmed evil with density of darkness and no lighted souls to traverse the heavens for they are birthed of the whore of Babylon who rests her feet on the heads of God’s precious Creations and laughs at the blindness of the lambs. Man realizes not that he walks and serves that which bears no soul essence within the breasts -- he follows reproductions of genetic fabrications in blindness. He realizes not that simply through Truth and confrontation with that Truth shall the evil replicas fall to the wayside."


GS

reply to post by Getsmart


Your post reminded me of an old Frank Herbert novel I read, about clones doing the space traveling, in order to keep the original population "safe." Wish I could remember the title, but not at the moment.
My point, though, to you, and anyone who would read this book, would be that the clones were called upon to build a "conscious" computer because their ship was run by something called an organic mental core, which always failed and went crazy--it was a human brain, detached from a body, jazzed up to run a spaceship. Bear with me here, I know this is out there, but after all, look what we're posting in, anyway.
They lost the OMC (organic mental core) that was the brain of the ship, so they had to try to make do building a computerized simulation of a "conscious" computer that could take its place, and so the novel was also about what consciousness was comprised of, so they could build it, and keeping in mind, they, themselves, were considered "second class" consciousness, as they were clones.....brilliant plot, if you ask me. irony out the as@@.

Anyway, my point is, in reading this, you were prodded to consider which kind of life mattered...were they, as clones, any less valid as humans, because they were copies. If a soul is what drives the spark that makes our synapses fire and heart beat electically, then they had that, too.

Just a thought.....

Don't get me wrong. I very much believe there may be "doubling" going on. But,how, holographically, or clone wise.....there could be many different ways what appears to be, seems to be, and all just ways to get us to pass a singular judgement when what is happening is anything but singular, so the judgement does not apply.....

My sense and knowing is that we are in times that challenge us about the value of life, as never before. And whatever has power over everything now, wishes us to judge that life is of little value, worthless, even, and in doing so, give up our own value. This is how such things work. So we should be quite careful in the judging, is all I am saying.

Though I am not strictly religious, nor overly a proponent of the christian bible, I hearken to the description of faith therein: to believe in what does not appear to be.....

Originally posted by Getsmart
ROYAL CLONES

I hate to be a shill here... but the only thing those pictures have in common is their hair cuts.

Originally posted by Getsmart

Originally posted by someotherguy

...all of these clones of previous leaders really makes me think that personas are being recycled to give the new inhabitant clone of a certain post or position some measure of legitimacy in the public eye. I think there may be some sort of recognition that is being triggered in the collective unconscious.

Hi Someotherguy,


Would you care to explain what you mean by "the new inhabitant clone" because the way I read it this could appear to imply that Clones are destined to be our planet's "new inhabitants" either joining us in the long term, mixing with us to remove human emotions from our offspring, or even to replace us as the future earthlings?

I actually meant "the new inhabitant clone of a certain post or position," in other words, the clone that is holding a particular post or position... I don't know if the dark forces that are using clones or even inhabiting them are destined to become the Earth's inhabitants, but i certainly think there is an on-going invasion and infiltration by these forces. Maybe now it is getting to the point of saturation that people are really starting to notice? Yesterday, it was reported that Medvedev "joked" about secret Russian alien files:

Medvedev has spoken about top secret files on aliens that may have landed in Russia.

In footage recorded Friday after a television interview, the former president joked that each Russian leader gets two folders with information about extraterrestrials that visited our planet — and stayed here.

Unseen on camera footage, he is heard telling a Ren TV journalist he could not tell "how many of them are among us, because it may cause panic."

Secret files on aliens? Russian Prime Minister makes televised joke

If you notice who reported the story, it was the Illuminati Rothschild Associated Press. So, of course, they are going to pass any warning of aliens off as a "joke," because they don't want people to figure out what is going on until it is too late.

edit on 9-12-2012 by Getsmart because: Clones are in ever increasing presence among us !

Yes, and as I mentioned before, it is getting to the point where it is noticeable, if not obvious!

Originally posted by Mugen

ROYAL CLONES

I hate to be a shill here... but the only thing those pictures have in common is their hair cuts.

Hi Mugen,


You aren't being a shill, but are simply exercising your judgment in evaluating whether people could be Clones or are otherwise simple look-alike's or maybe not even that. Regarding that article about ROYAL CLONES (click the link above), I did not write it but simply posted it here to show mainstream press interest in the subject. Some of those portrayed are quite similar and others are not. We shall see if are conclusively Clones in the strict sense of identical DNA.


Queen Victoria (1819-1901) and her great-great-greatgreat-granddaughter Princess Beatrice:


They both present similar ovoid head shape although Beatrice's seems a little more oblong and slightly narrower. Feature relative positioning and occupation of head surface is similar. The angles of view are slightly different hence we cannot properly evaluate on these two images whether their nose length is identical although it is close enough for Clones. Also the painted portrait is stylized and might in fact distort the actual physical reality of Queen Victoria, who in reality might look more like Beatrice or to the contrary less like her. Also Queen Victoria seems to be a little bit better fed than Beatrice, possibly rounding out her features?


Eye shape and size are a close match, although Beatrice's eyes seem closer together. Brow line and forehead height and width are the same, chins are very similar as well as their jawlines. Ear position is close, if you take into account head angles on each image, and what can be seen of their inner structure isn't in conflict. This would be the clincher, requiring further detailed examination - with such similarities inner ear pattern could probably help determine more accurately if Beatrice is indeed a Clone of Queen Victoria.


Mary (1867-1953), King George V's consort and granddaughter Queen Elizabeth II


Here we have a serious problem which is comparing people who have aged. This causes the soft tissues to bloat and collapse, making one's facial bone structure for the most part concealed behind an avalanche of crumbling flesh. Unfortunately this erases many of the characteristic traits which reveal one's visual identity making carriers of quite different DNA encoding to tend to merge into a similar visual image. In this case they are not even that similar, making their identification give little beyond a simple "family air" about them. It is impossible that QE II was cloned from her grandmother, given that the image further down the page shows Mary much younger looking a lot more like QE II's little sister Margaret.


These are just a few analyses of the images presented. For a proper identification, one must have several sources of imagery, preferably by several artists or photographed from different distances using several lenses. The reason for this is that painters will "interpret" the portrayal of an individual according to their artistic style and also to harmonize features to please the sitter or at times to reach a more visually pleasing painting. Also portrait photographers use longer focal length lenses to reduce the features of a face, while shorter lenses make them larger. Hence several pictures taken from the same angle with lenses of different focal lengths will not look like they have the same proportions of facial features. Finally it is useful to have for each individual you are comparing front, three quarter profile and full profile views. If at least some of these are from before old age sets in this is a plus. Finally one is fortunate to have pictures of the ear pattern to verify identity of their DNA.


Getsmart

Originally posted by tetra50

Anyway, my point is, in reading this, you were prodded to consider which kind of life mattered...were they, as clones, any less valid as humans, because they were copies. If a soul is what drives the spark that makes our synapses fire and heart beat electically, then they had that, too.

Don't get me wrong. I very much believe there may be "doubling" going on. But,how, holographically, or clone wise.....there could be many different ways what appears to be, seems to be, and all just ways to get us to pass a singular judgement when what is happening is anything but singular, so the judgement does not apply...

Hi tetra50,


You might want to check out this link, the folks there are also trying to find what that book you mention might be:


LINK to Sci Fi Forum


You do well to point out what does distinguish us as Humans versus other life forms which might inhabit physical bodies. After all many animals also inhabit physical bodies yet we do not consider them Human. Having a brain which functions rapidly and computes large amounts of data is not sufficient to classify one as human, and this for two reasons. Any living entity with brain power would then be considered human even if of an entirely different biological nature, such as Reptilians with a high intellectual development. Also any physical body connected to some form of supercomputer would then qualify as Human? Not likely.


We also have emotions as well, yet animals do too, hence having a 'soul' characterizes us best. I'll take an illiterate person with a good soul any day over a bright educated individual without one. It is that "spark" you so deftly describe which makes us what we are: Human. Hence a Cloned body with a Human Soul is in fact Human. A naturally born body without one is not. What is however apparently characteristic of the Clones we can observe in public positions - be they in politics, government, finance or entertainment - is that they have only feigned emotions and apparently no "conscience" rendering them capable of the most horrendous acts ranging from pedophilia and human sacrifice to enslavement and genocide. Deceitful lying and plotting against humanity is merely nursery school behavior to them.


Then there are the naturally born and Cloned people who are "demon possessed" which is in fact some form of Alien take-over of their body as a host Avatar. This could be the sort of situation we are in today, with large numbers of Clones programmed and coordinated by an secret organization which engineers them, places them into their current positions and manages them from behind the scenes. Apparently demons can either possess them at length or even, similarly to Mr Smith in the movie The Matrix, hop from one host to another switching bodies, locations and social positions so as to exercise whatever power they choose at whatever time they wish. Hence a small number of individuals could take over the minds and actions of countless Clones disseminated all over the planet in many key positions. Could this be what is referred to when we are told that "Power Changes People" ?


Getsmart

reply to post by someotherguy

Hi Someotherguy,


It is indeed strange that the Clone Dmitry Medvedev would 'out' this information. Could it be that he was simply playing mind games with the journalists to blow them off, not expecting them to report this information - or are we witnessing a rebellion of the Clones against their Alien masters?


We can note that while Dr Beter said over thirty years ago that the Russians had pretty much already replaced all of their leaders with Robotoids, we are now seeing possibly a much more advanced generation of such beings in power in the Kremlin. Unfortunately they are also in the White House and the Capitol as well as in key positions in many other parts of American society. So this is not an isolated problem but one which extends to many parts of the world. To what is Medvedev referring exactly? He does mention the Men in Black movies, so this also has trait to a task force managing the penetration of our Planet by various species of extraterrestrials. I know for fact that the Draco are indeed here, even if hiding out for the time being. What else is out there, and which ones are running the Clone Conspiracy? It's anyone's guess.


GS

Hi Getsmart! Thanks for a super interesting thread. I've been reading it and talking about it with my significant other. He is kindly entertaining me and reading along. He doesn't post here, but he noticed something and I said I would see if you or anyone else can resolve the question he brought up.

In the Chelsea Clinton clone pics, he thinks that he can see both features of Hiliary and Bill in her face. He thinks that the original photo of Ms. Tyler resembles Chelsea fairly well, but not either of the Billary duo. Is there a way that they can get around this when cloning? Obviously even with conventional technology anyone can get plastic surgery to tweak even the tiniest details of their face. Is that the way it's done? Or do you think that something more advanced is used?

Thanks for keeping this thread up to date. Love coming back to read it. Peace!

reply to post by TheOtter


Hi The Otter,


All the best to you and your SO - it is very helpful to get feedback such as you have given because seldom do folks post here so it is sort of like shouting in the woods not knowing if anyone can hear you. Of course this is work I am doing "for the record" and I am not trying to convince anyone of what they ought to think or believe, yet there is a very uncomfortable frequency of well-known people looking like reproductions of earlier well-known people. This is what, for lack of a better term, I refer to as the Clone Conspiracy.


I live in a large city, a megapolis, and see many thousands of faces every day. Yet I never see a 'regular Joe' who looks just like some former King or President. Why then does this occur in alarming frequency when examining the appearance of celebrities and political leaders? That has become for me a disturbing mystery I seek to solve, trying as I might. In the meantime I simply add more candidates for exposure as 'potential Clones' insofar as their physique corresponds so closely to that of a prior VIP from another era that it gives goosebumps. We cannot know for certain that they are indeed Clones unless one can obtain verifiable DNA samples from both individuals, which would be rather simple unless there actually is a Conspiracy, which would mean that anything can be falsified from the bodies left in tombs to the lab results.


So we are left to use logic and proceed by elimination, while searching for particular patterns in the use of certain types of DNA genitors for specific classes of individuals put into specific social roles or functions. I have noted that there are some dead individuals from the more or less distant past who are used as athletes, actors, musicians, bankers, CEO's, journalists and politicians - probably others are used as soldiers probably raised to the rank of Generals, although this is something I have not had the time to investigate. One interesting event in my research is something I shall soon post in the other Clone Conspiracy thread dedicated to Cloned Stars and Celebrities. It is interesting for its possible implications regarding out topic, and might even help bring a better illustration of the phenomenon your significant other has astutely detected in Chelsea Clinton.


To describe this in general terms before posting it in the other thread, I discovered that a movie star and a film director who got married were both Clones. I shall expose from whom they were Cloned and we can note that there is a logical concordance to the choice of their DNA donors and an intriguing connection with their marriage. Also, more interestingly, I noted that their daughter who also rose to fame is also a Clone. Yet she was Cloned from someone entirely different, hence the mystery: this means that this daughter was probably NOT the naturally conceived child of these two Clones, finding her DNA in her parents' gene pool. Either the ovum was implanted or otherwise 'tweaked' by third parties prior to childbirth, or the baby was changed at the hospital ? Another theory would be that somehow Clones could have programmed into their DNA any number of possible DNA encodings of future Clones to be used by their issue in a quasi-natural reproduction process ?


Regarding Chelsea Clinton, there is a phenomenon which is similar to the one illustrated by the above mentioned case. Here this daughter has something of her mother's looks, while nonetheless being clearly the Clone of another person. Just like you justly note that Chelsea has something of Bill and of Hillary. This is something I think which we might attribute to one of several possible influences. First, we know their filiation, and in our minds their physiques and aesthetics are associated unconsciously when we see one of them, the other's looks are thus attached to our impressions of their appearance. Second, it is known that twins, and by the same token Clones, will have slight changes to their appearance and shaping due to environmental circumstances, of which we might consider the psychosocial environment of the family home. Third, it is also possible that people who are together for a long time wind up looking like one another. This can sometimes be noticed with spouses who after a number of years tend to look alike despite having quite different features.


So to reply to your question, it is likely that the original DNA donor would look nothing like the "non biological" parents of a Clone, but that the Clone would look something like those parents for having been raised by them and modelled their own appearance unconsciously thinking she was their biological issue. What I find more bizarre is that Cloned couples would have Cloned children, and not procreate naturally. Is this because for some reason they cannot reproduce? Or are they Robotoids ???


GS

reply to post by Getsmart


I actually had the book, a few short years ago, and read it. I had to find it used, online and order it because I wanted to read the original copy, and it had been reprinted at a later date and expurgated. It was a time in Frank Herbert's writing career when he was co-authoring with someone else, though I cannot at the moment remember the co-author. I will look around the house and see if I can locate it, and if I do, log onto the sci-fi forum and drop the title for them.
I found it a fascinating read, and it deals with a great deal of the philosophical and metaphysical forum's threads right here on ATS, as to what constitutes consciousness, humanity and the soul, as you so adroitly discussed.

I found your reply very well illucidated and interesting. Thank you. And you addressed many of the possibilities head on which I was thinking of when I wrote, but there are also other possibilities within those. Such as, perhaps as Mr. Smith in the Matrix changed bodies, "possessing" them, at will, it is also possible that a conscious entity might find themselves, at someone else's will, in different bodies and lives, and sometimes in control, and at other times, just a conscious observer, with no ability to directly affect or take action. That's a wrinkle inbetween your stated possibilities which can make you stop and think, a moment. What hell would it be to be "starting over," continuously, arriving in a "life" in mid-stream, so to speak, with no prior knowledge, or to be riding "shotgun," in a body not belonging to you inherently, and watching from the backseat with no control, as some of the horror you describe take place, with no ability to stop it, seemingly at the hand of a body you are inhabiting.

And how would we tell? A nightmare, really, of confusion. I have no doubt the things you describe are happening, but I try to keep an open mind about the possibilities, as much as possible. Sadly, I think it is almost impossible to tell, and that therefore, damage may be done to souls being present without will or culpability, and I hate this more than anything--anyone suffering through the acts of another on either side.
The possibilities, then of victimization. are greater and more widespread, when it shouldn't happen at all.

Your discussion of the soul and humanity made me think of two other things, as well. Another Frank Herbert book, Dune, and the Bene Gesseret's test for "humanity," vs. being an animal. The black box. The test was necessary after a century of war between humanity and the computers and machines they had built which became sentient and sought to destroy their creators. And the second thing it made me think of was a thread here recently about Black's Law Dictionary, and its description of humanity. If you have a look at that, it seems we were slaves, legally, all along......

Originally posted by Getsmart
reply to post by TheOtter

 

I live in a large city, a megapolis, and see many thousands of faces every day. Yet I never see a 'regular Joe' who looks just like some former King or President.

Why do you keep forgetting me? I look just like a former royal. You said so yourself.

Hey Getsmart: Just stopped by your thread again to let you know the title of the book, if you are on the science fiction forum where the book is being looked for. It is called Destination: Void, by Frank Herbert. It was first published in 1965 or '67 in a Galaxy magazine. Later, it was edited and published as a paperback novel. It is not, as I first thought, the series he co-authored with Bill Ransom. That is a whole other series about a planet called Pandora, a complete water world, and colonizers dropped off as "unworthy" by the computer running their ship.

reply to post by tetra50


Hi Tetra50,


Thanks for this info. I found a link to read the first of the three volumes online so here it is for those interested:


DESTINATION: VOID by Frank Herbert


GS

Originally posted by someotherguy

Why do you keep forgetting me? I look just like a former royal. You said so yourself.

Hi Someotherguy,


I do not keep forgetting you. You are the exception that confirms the rule, or maybe the rule is incorrect? Then there would be only so many "Archetypes" of human bodies available in our DNA, which means that over time each identical model would have to be statistically reproduced? Then the inordinate pattern of reproduction of the same models among people of high position in the public eye would be due to these being Favorite Archetypes which are thus promoted by society to fame and fortune? Are we that superficial that our society is run by physical appearance and deference to those who look the part? Then you ought to soon be promoted to fame and fortune, as you do have those "winning looks".


Otherwise, there is something else going on with our DNA, some party or parties are tinkering with it, and maybe have been tinkering with Human DNA for some time. Only in the past few decades have we been exposed to this process through the media, and told that science is finally arriving at some known facts. Yet possibly much of this was already registered in the Library of Alexandria before it was burned down, and this knowledge transferred to the hermetically sealed vaults of the Vatican Library and the secret caches of secret societies which thrive on occulting knowledge they then encode and let drip out one drop at a time to a few rare initiates?


I have yet to hear a plausible explanation as to why a specific DNA is produced by one's progenitor's seed, and how it is not the same by any measure between siblings except with the phenomenon of identical twins. With the Clone Conspiracy we are in fact witnessing the phenomenon of identical twins by from different parents over a great time distance. How is this done, is there some aspect of the reproductive equation we are not informed of, or is there a mystical or dimensional process in biological reproduction which has not yet been isolated and studied? If not, then there would still be something which could be called a Clone Conspiracy.


Getsmart

Was seeking a place to interject my thoughts without having to launch a thread myself. I am of as cynical as they come and seek to find out what the right hand is doing while the left is so emersed in "sudden events and or tragedies." I have seemed to only have picked up on such nuances about the time I joined here. With 12/21/12 around the corner there are people that are of all of a sudden have issues and are unable to be seen or out of the spotlight per se.

I would like to offer my, un-researched notions here. I became to wonder what was happening with various celebs, those who were of significant in many ways - but not only a celebrity of hollywood. I don't have a lot of time to read lengthy threads such as this in one sitting and usually I am thrusted back into my domestic duties by the time I read 20 or so posts; and then my thoughts are adrift from initial OP or reason why I honed in on the subject in the first place. Please allow me to apologize --- being called away for my motherly duties...but to go right to the point.

George H. Bush - checks into hospital for a brief term of "pneumonia"
Bob Dole - pneumonia bout.
George W. Bush - been out of site for a long time and returns with a new "do" his hair is quite curly and his manmerisms seem to be off point.
Hillary Clinton - she has fallen with a concusion after falling ill to a stomach virus - she has been all around the world and close to third world viruses, disease and demize but never fallen ill with a headache! Or were those Clones who went in her place? Is there a clone about to come out - Is this why her hair has grown out for the replacement?
Bill Clinton - he went rogue on all things american and became a full fledge vegan! I have tried and you can't do it over night! But if you could be "reprogrammed" to only have the taste buds of such cuisine....bingo!
Nelson Mandela - In the news but off camera and hasnt been seen for a very long time.
Jesse Jackson Jr sure took a long vacay for exhaustion IN THE HOSPITAL and then resigned.
I listen to the news channels most of the time and all of the Prime Time anch ors have been off air without a reason or events of some national report akin of the elections or being the talking heads like say Solidad Obrien. All week they have had standins and not the most recognized replacements that are usually come in to pinch hit. I find this to be an extreme oddity. I know because I have become drawn to allowing them to stream while I am typing/reading/searching alternative news.

NOW I just viewed Barry's somber moment in the press yesterday and I thought wow he is acting like he did at the fist debate....off point - struggle to "read" comments - not striking with his prose! Makes me say HMMM.

Holloywood whos who for the moment - died strangely - Michael Jackson, Witney Houston, there are several I know...just I don't have time.

There are also people who have made sensational news with killing / hurting / torturing children, people and they have no remorse or seem to display no apathy - stone cold faces when they should me "in the hospital" with the diagnosis of exhastion.

.....I have a demanding 4 yr old.....back to post more if I should. Maybe someone will direct me to a thread where this is already a discussion or maybe a thread can be started. I won't have the time to nuture a thread of this type.

reply to post by mcsandy


Hi McSandy,


Many thanks for sharing your observations. Clearly you are observant. Many folks who are like you over-solicited by life's demands tend to block off any unusual perceptions and ignore their own senses so as to not "rock the boat" - something I can well understand as it makes for a very rough ride when the underpinnings of our reality are thus shaken by direct observation...


Each of your remarks is valid and well articulated. You also draw no direct conclusions, which is something we must refrain from until being further informed. The reason I tend to do so is mostly to elicit my own critique of my declared arguments and hopefully to stimulate alternative interpretations of this data from others present. However, who is Cloning, what their motivation is, what the end game is, cannot yet be asserted in full confidence but only tentatively.


I encourage you to read what you may of the two Clone Conspiracy threads in the Skunk Works section of ATS when you find a spare moment. Affirming that each and every retained candidate in these threads considered to be a Clone is in fact one is irrelevant, for if not they would be an exception and not the rule. Many of not most of those presented here as Clones are clearly DNA replicas of an original DNA bearer from the past.


Hence the fact that Human Cloning is not only a scientific reality but also has been engaged on a policy level and rolled out globally using specific sources for DNA replication is verifiable as factual. This leave us with the task of ascertaining WHO is Cloning, and for what bizarre purposes. One that is clear is that this is for Power and Control given that most if not all of our Politicians are Clones. Another is for influence and Mass Mind Control as most if not all of our Entertainers are Clones.


In my next post I shall quote a source, declaring themselves renegades from British Intelligence, which addresses this point. Let us remember that this is another theory, and we have yet to find arrays of evidence to confirm or disprove this hypothesis.


Cheers,


Getsmart

GERMANIC BRITISH MONARCHY CLONING POLITICIANS AND ENTERTAINERS ?

This theory was discovered in the Beauty and the Beast Omega blogspot where it was posted by a member with the pseudonym Ant who is reportedly a former British Intelligence operative. It goes like this.


To access the Blog Page containing this theory in its discussion context CLICK HERE

What is Royal Arch Freemasonry Zionism?

An interesting question and good answer:

The worship of Lucifer the Light-Bearer.

How did it all begin?

Well, the British Monarchy and the aristocracy knew full well what was going on in the colonies of the British Empire but they were quite happy to keep their coffers filled with the taxes levied from the middle-classes.

They knew about the millions of slaves who were being worked to death on the plantations. In some colonies, the slaves were not even given food and water, women gave birth in the fields and then died along with their offspring. Auschwitz was similar.

What was the response to this of the British Monarchy and aristocracy?

It is fascinating to look at what depths, guilt can drive a person to, what lengths he or she will go to in order to try and expiate their burden of shame. The insane beliefs created by deluded minds, intent on saving their souls from damnation.

The British Monarchy and aristocracy decided to try and keep their souls immortal - this quest was driven by their very real fear of hell and damnation when they died.

Hence the insane experiments in mind-splitting to create 'sons of god' who would descend into hell and rescue their evil souls. Laughable but unfortunately true.

Alters are the product of mind-splitting. They are the fragmented soul of 'I' of a person. During torture, a person can OBE (out of body experience) because the NDE (near death experience) ensures this.

The mistaken belief of the Monarchists was that they could mind-split and trap their 'alters' into rocks, flasks, bottles (any sort of container really) - rather like the old magicians of folkloric legends i.e. Arabian Nights...or the many magi in the bible/Torah.

Read the Book of Daniel for a blow-by-blow account of how the King of Babylon created 'sons of god' and remote viewers from his Hebrew slaves.

These trapped alters were then put into a fertilised human egg and implanted into one of their chosen 'mothers of darkness' i.e.who would bear the next Queen or King incumbent. The idea being that the dead Monarch or member of the aristocracy, would then reincarnate!

The Monarchists also decided to implant their 'royal' DNA outside the Royal nest i.e. as 'cuckoos' in other nests.

Why?

So that they could then use these blood relatives to govern society in all its aspects.

The chosen mothers had no idea that they were being used as 'brood mares' and tend to refer to themselves as the 'goose who lays the golden eggs'.

The Monarchists then kept records of where their DNA had been implanted outside of the Royal lineage.

Eggs with their DNA strands were implanted into women chosen for their 'superior genes',who had been put under mind control.

A clue to an 'Illuminati' mother is that she will tend to refer to her child as a 'starfish' - the five-pointed star. The Duchess calls her baby a 'starfish' in Alice in Wonderland programming. (Alice later discards the poor child, referring to it as as a 'pig').

Hence the huge amount of 'bastard' children, who were then picked to be the next leaders, politicians, writers, artists of the next generation. This was to be an almost entirely successful operation in my generation but judging by the general mediocrity of UK society in terms of philosophical thought, literature, arts and science, maybe not such a good idea!

These 'bastards' were supposed to not only have a few of the 'royal' DNA strands, some of them were also supposed to have super-human abilities which had been put in via British Intelligence training i.e. alters with photographic memories, abnormal strength etc. However these 'alters' cannot be accessed by anyone apart from the Illuminati programmer i.e. controller at British Intelligence.

In general, the Royal Arch Freemasonry Satanic cult was divided into those who carried the 'Egyptian' genes i.e. the royal circles and those who had the genes of the slave class i.e. 'Hebrew' genes.

This follows on from the tremendous fear that the British royal circles had of Hebrew intelligence and the need to suppress and control it.

The British royal circles were aiming for immortality i.e. the symbol of this is their Masonic wavy sword - one can see the blue/green wavy flame in one of the underground caverns in Jerusalem. They believed their souls to be damned and these two techniques were ways in which to cheat hell and damnation.

Did either of the two techniques actually work though?

The transferral of a soul from one body to a fertilised egg and the idea that one could actually create a 'son of god' who could descend into the underworld and free their souls.

No, on both accounts.

What is interesting about the entire, sordid and despicable enterprise is that the Intelligence Services started to graft the DNA of their own heroes and heroines from the SOE, in order to create 'elite' agents.

They also used the DNA of SS Nazi officers to breed their own new officer class.

The Hebrew DNA recruits were told that they would not live past 30 years old and would then be 'thrown off the freedom train'. This is how dangerous 'Hebrew' DNA was perceived to be, by the ruling classes.

The project failed.

However, it did leave a large amount of their bemused recruits with the vague notion that they had had a past life as either an SS officer, as one of the SOE or as a Jewish person from the holocaust.

The grafted-on DNA had memories at a cellular level and these were communicated through dreams and flashbacks.

People who have had transplants sometimes complain of having 'picked up' the habits of the donor - a scientific mystery at the time of writing but one that will be doubtless be explained in the fullness of time.

Getsmart

For contextual interpretation, and further elucidation of what is proposed in this theory of WHO and WHAT is behind the Clone Conspiracy, let us add to this thread the posting preceeding the one quoted above, this time by a blog member named Ex-Zombie.

Genetic research in the UK began far earlier than the mainstream historians would like to suggest. It began in the 1830s.

In 1980, British Intelligence were experimenting with far more sophisticated equipment than that poor fool of a Took has managed to 'invent' at the University of Warwick. They had already perfected techniques by which one could move objects around a screen simply by 'thought' i.e. brainwaves and electrodes. This knowledge, is only being leaked to UK universities now and on a small drip feed.

Let us cast our minds back to the 1800s and look at which groups of people were being targeted for genetic experimentation. The British Monarchy and their associates, conformed to the societal prejudice and stereotyping that Jews were genetically more intelligent than the rest of us. Untrue. One could argue that it is Jewish culture which has done much to promote education in a similar way to that of eastern cultures but one also has to say that the original Hebrew genes had already been diluted within Europe to the point of almost complete assimiliation into the gentile population - despite Jewish groups maintaining their bloodlines. Nowadays, roughly a third of European, gentile males carry what has been identified as the 'Jewish' gene.

The Monarchists believed that the Jews were a cut above the rest in terms of intellectual capacity for knowledge and understanding i.e. they had 'superior' genes in this respect.

The Jews were also seen as an extremely dangerous threat to those in aristocratic circles. Why? They were 'too clever' by half and the aristocracy knew only too well, their own genetic inferiority, not just in respect to the Jews but to the rest of society in general.

The two main factors in this arena: brains versus Old Money.

By the end of the 19th century, the Jews had made a large amount of money out of banking. Why banking? They had been denied any other profession, having even been de-barred from trades and crafts guilds in Europe. The only 'profession' open to them in European society, had been money-lending.

This made the Jewish people of Europe, doubly dangerous to the Monarchies and aristocracies: brains and money.

To make matters worse, the Jews were then rallied by Theodore Herzl to petition for their ancient homeland: Israel. The homeland they had been praying for, for over a millenium. They now had the money and general clout to do so in European society.

This was to constitute an incredibly serious threat to the powers that be and they decided to 'indoctrinate' Herzl and use him as a puppet. They then sent him back to his people with the offer of a homeland in Uganda. Now, if you were Jewish, would you really accept such an offer? The Jews rejected the offer.

Things began to look very difficult indeed for the European Monarchists. They had been used to kicking the Jews out of their countries, then stealing their money, possessions, land by pogroms and genocide, wiping out whole Jewish communities, villages and towns. The Jews now had too much money and power in European society for them to even attempt such a thing.

Therefore the more 'intelligent' members of the Monarchies and aristocracies, had to think up a new plan.

Give them Israel but control it via British administration and authority over immigration and citizenship. Then take their money (in payment for this huge condescension) and their land. The money they were allowed to take with them to this newly created British-run State would then be supervised and controlled by the Monarchists.

Good idea so far. It worked.

Allenby was sent in to do exactly that.

British Officers then ordered the Jews who were escaping the gas chambers of Europe to form military units and forced them to serve under their authority. These people who were arriving on the refugee ships were barely capable of refusing and in the main, they didn't.

The British Officers supplied the Jews with armaments, then organised and ordered them to attack the indigenous Arab populations in Israel, to force them off their land.

The Jews were put into the most terrible dilemma: behave in the same way as their Nazi oppressors in Europe, by attacking indigenous populations and throwing them off their land - or face certain death at the hands of the British.

A choice that we all know about - having served in military intelligence. Disobey or question orders and you face death.

The biggest question of all is: would the Jews have done this if they had been given a choice in the matter? Would they have willingly entered into such violent and bloody skirmishes with the Arab (and other) indigenous populations on the land at that time?

Or would they have made peace with their neighbours and assimilated into their societies as they had done so in ancient times, before and after the Roman colonisation of Jerusalem (and also in Spain later on)?

Or would they have attacked the Arabs and other populations anyway? How could they have done, arriving off ships, half-dead and despairing - without guns. It was the British who supplied them with armaments and made them fight. They were too weak to resist the British and their plans for the region.

The British Monarchy. The Royal Satanic Battleship had gone into overdrive.

They had decided upon a plan and that was to create their own Satanic version of Zion and at whatever cost, they would control the whole operation.

Most people only understand the word 'Zion' as being Jewish yet the Christians have talked about 'Sion' for centuries. The French set up Priories of Sion, all over the world.

The Royal Arch Freemasons had their own brand of 'Zionism' and at that point, they had more money and power than any other group.

What is Royal Arch Freemasonry Zionsim?

The worship of Lucifer the Light-bringer.

This is a seemingly valid explanation of the difference between what we today know as Zionism which is very different from Judaism or the Israeli people who are among the victims of the Zionists and not the culprits. The Priory of Sion is also something which we can note is part of this project, as it incarnates in its LEITMOTIV the very same principles of procreating and reincarnating a Royal Lineage (Jesus was of Royal blood). Also we can note that the pioneers of biological research leading to Cloning and Genetic Engineering have themselves been Cloned and used as actors in movies either relating to the Priory of Sion - namely the Da Vinci Code - or relating to an Alien ET connection. We shall see about these Clones used in recent movies in the other thread about Stars and Celebrity Clones.


This also reveals the Masonic Connection to the Clone Conspiracy, and it can be assumed that any number of highest level Freemasons have both facilitated, covered up, and even offered directly their own family's services for "Hosting Clones" as their own offspring. This is very likely the case, as in at least some instances using unwitting carrier mothers cannot be envisaged as the only or best solution. In this instance we can assume that at least some of the offspring of Top Freemasons are possibly Clones. Any from such families and bearing a strong resemblance with former Royals or with key Biologists or other dignitaries of the American Revolution (Masonic Heroes) or Heroes of other accomplices to the Clone Conspiracy, must face the strong likelihood that they are indeed Clones. Being of such origins myself, I keep on the lookout for from whom I might have been myself Cloned - although to date I have not discovered this.


That leads us to the important question, what is a Clone with respect to an original Human Being?


In a modest reply, I can state that a Clone is the same thing as a regular person, as long as it bears a human soul. However, this is often not the case, some are SOULLESS and some are Demon Possessed. A few have somehow maintained a Soul Presence and have fought off efforts to split their mind into Alters and to force out their soul in order to use them as Empty Programming Vessels or Hosts for other entities.


At minimum, even those Clones with a soul and fighting off Mind Control Programming are subject to the DNA born memories of their past life as the DNA donor and will have certain behavioral predispositions stemming from that. Hence they will have to lead a double battle, the first against attempts by the Cloners to Program them in MK-Ultra type Nazi inspired torture, abuse, electroshock and drug-induced hypnosis sessions, while also struggling against the enemy inside, the DNA program of their genetic originator.


This means that one can possibly be a Clone without being a robotized mind-controlled creature, even if that is the case for the majority of Clones. It is important in making a judgment about a Clone to closely and carefully examine their life and their steadfast commitments to particular behavior patterns.


Getsmart

WARNING

I was just after posting this targeted by Monastic thugs, who were trying to set me up either to intimidate me or worse. This means that something in the past few posts has STRUCK A NERVE and therefore I highly recommend that at minimum some of you download this page (right mouse key or control click and save as HTML).


Regards,


Getsmart