William Bond, Pete Jackson & Rasa Von Werder  on Royalty 

9-30-22 

From Rasa:  William - these Kings & Queens.  I saw yesterday a film about the home of Lady Diana, the Spencers, & it was the hugest most elegant castle imaginable, where she mostly grew up.  All updated.

 

Then they showed Camilla's castle which Charles 'bought her' for 45 MILLION POUNDS!  It has 2000 acres!  It is filled with original Chippendale furniture worth millions.

 

OK these Royals brag about their ANCESTRY.  How did they get SO RICH?  I know they're not killing people now {that I know of}, but isn't it based on the people they killed & robbed years ago, their ancestors? 

Like Queen Victoria, in her day the English invaded India & killed a lot of people. I saw one documentary where they surrounded a square filled with Hindu men, women & children, the English military came in, blocked off all exits with their tanks, & fired their machine guns on them, killing most or all of them.  Queen Victoria & other 'nobles' benefited financially from their occupation & exploitation of India, & other areas where imperialism took place. I heard that England once controlled one fifth of the world through imperialism.

 

And put straight out, did not these ancestors accumulate all their wealth & property by killing & robbing people?  And their military leaders also were rewarded with land, castles & titles, right?

 

And so, their wealth is built on war - Murder, stealing & exploitation.   Is that so?   Rasa

 

From William Bond:     I agree Rasa. Royal families were originally just robbers who took other people’s land and property by force.  You can see this is the history of the Normans who invaded and conquered Britain in 1066 where they simply plundered the country and took whatever they wanted and anyone whom resisted were slaughtered. 

 

Royalty became respectable through propaganda. For instance they talked about the, “divine right of Kings” and claimed they had the right to rule because it was the will of God.  As the result of this propaganda there are now many people who are royalists who worship the royal family. Fortunately, they no longer have any political power and we now can vote an unpopular government out of power.

 

From William Bond:   Hi Everyone

I remember as a young man hearing priest in Church read out the following verse. “I tell you, every kind of sin and slander can be forgiven, but blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven. Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but anyone who speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come” (Matthew verses 31–32).

 

I remember at the time thinking that this didn’t make any sense because the Son of Man and the Son of God was suppose to be the same thing, so even though we live in physical bodies we are still spiritual beings. So why was blasphemy against the Holy Spirit so important? I forgot about it until recently when I saw a video of a speech by Steve Bannon who quoted the same verse and I thought about it again. 

 

Over the years I have read many authors who claim that the Holy Spirit is feminine. Many claiming the Holy Spirit is the Goddess Sophia, this idea comes from the Gnostic Gospels. Others point out the Egyptian Isis religion greatly influenced Christianity. (Jesus spent his childhood in Egypt). The Goddess Isis had a husband called Osiris and her son was Horus. So this was a similar trilogy to that of Christianity with the Father being Osiris, the son Horus and the Holy Spirit was Isis. So if we accept that the Holy Spirit is feminine then perhaps this verse does make sense. 

 

Patriarchal religions and societies not only cause great suffering to women but men as well. Because it is men who fight and die in wars and most men have to put up with unjust and unfair societies that are ruled by a wealthy elite while most people live in poverty. What is commonplace in all patriarchal religions and societies is that they have no respect for women. So is this what Jesus meant when he said, “but anyone who speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come.”

 

This then suggests when we criticize, condemn or ridicule the feminine we cut ourselves off from God. This unfortunately effects women as well as men because when women listen to patriarchal indoctrination and no longer respect themselves, then they are also cut off from God. This suggests if we want to living a a caring world, we need to learn to repent and once again respect the maternal and nurturing love of all women.   William

 

From Pete Jackson:

Very well-said, William.  Excellent insights, I never really thought of like that, but it makes sense.  Much like so many other things Jesus had said that had a deeper esoteric meaning that would not be fully understood until later, sometimes centuries or millennia later.

 

It is strange that Steve Bannon would quote that particular verse.  He was the same guy who, four years ago, warned that Women were going to "take charge of this world".  He said it like it was a bad thing, lol.  He was apparently terrified of the #MeToo movement at the time.

 

https://www.businessinsider.com/steve-bannon-oprah-women-take-charge-of-society-2018-2

 

William says:     Although Bannon used this quote in his speech he had another explanation for the meaning of this quote. I don't know what his opinions of women are, but you do get many wealthy men making comments about women ruling the world.    William

 

Pete says:   Indeed, the wealthy men seem to be the very first men to see the writing on the wall, whether for good or ill. 

Rasa Von Werder says:

Friends, thanks for this, I put it for publication.

Re the MeToo movement. This & other items of women speaking out against men, exposing their transgressions, is a result / symptom of Female Empowerment. When women were WEAK no one listened to them. No one published their complaints in media or press. They were IGNORED. When they went to the Church, the police, media or institutions or wherever men were that were abusing them, they were told to shut up, trivialized, condemned – indeed, even targeted for punishment. So women had the tendency to shut up & they still do in many cases. Once a female DA frightened me when I accused this guy of robbing me of thousands of dollars, she said, as if I was the perpetrator or unworthy of respect,

          “Do you have many visitors here?”

          I swear – she really said this. It sounding like she was accusing me of whoring & it was REALLY SCARY.

 

          About the Holy Spirit. Mary Daly complained how the Catholic Church made the Holy Trinity two men & a Spirit – no part of it is a woman. But if the Holy Spirit is Feminine then She is there.

          Your theory holds water. They say in the Catholic Church, those who have a deep devotion for Mary are the greatest of the Saints – it sets them apart. I have noticed it’s true.

          God must be the Female principle. People use the word ‘feminine’ which I don’t especially like because in Patriarchy, they, forcing us to be ‘feminine’ have beguiled us to be PASSIVE. If feminine is nurturing, good. But if feminine is merely personality then BAD because it is the passive that conquistadors mow over, exploit, steal from & kill – ditto with imperialists, ditto with any group or army of ‘conquerors’, warlords or the like. I recall reading re. Christopher Columbus first meeting Indians & saying in so many words:

          “They are friendly & nice, we can deal with them.”

          Translation:  They are passive, not aggressive. We can take them over, steal what they have, have our way with them.

          They want women to be the same:  Friendly, supportive to men, weak & passive, nurturing to men & expecting little, feeling helpless when they are taken advantage of, exploited or savaged, keeping quiet about it.

          Pete, about the wealthy men who see the WRITING ON THE WALL.

          Wealthy are usually EDUCATED. If educated they have seen STATISTICS of the futurists who say all the trends are PRO WOMEN. Women are taking over education & therefore, eventually, the work place.

          They also know that women are SUPERIOR TO MEN by virtue of two XX chromosomes while men have only one X & a broken down X called ‘Y’ & because of this Y deteriorating – human men will be EXTINCT.

          Many, if not all educated men, know these facts or something of them.  And so to the EDUCATED the WRITING IS ON THE WALL.

          And I believe that BECAUSE OF THIS human males, who are the secret Shadow Govt, the Illuminati, who rule the world, have gotten HYSTERICAL.  They can’t stop God or her BIOLOGY, they are being killed off. And so they are trying to take the human race with them, or at least, disable & injure untold numbers of them.

How will this help them? It won’t. All their wars & systems have been ‘temporary fixes’ for them – like Henry VIII shutting down all the monasteries & their services in England. It will backfire on them. I don’t know how effective their destruction of society will be. According to conspiracy experts they are trying to kill of billions through famine, lack of services & supplies, breakdown of social structures & all that goes with them.

          They have been waging wars against others since Patriarchy began but they could never destroy the human race & I doubt that they will, even if they employ nuclear warfare. After all, we did throw two atom bombs on Japan but they recovered & fast.

          And so, yes, the writing is on the wall – human men will perish, women will run the world, it will be a woman-only world.

          I know you don’t believe men are going extinct William, but Dr. Bryan Sykes, the world’s top geneticist, says they will.  Your dreams will come true William, but not in the way you wished. As for me, as long as the atrocities stop, whatever way it will work, I’m happy.     Rasa        

 

From William:  Agreed Rasa, patriarchy likes to claim the feminine is 'weak' in the same way they claim love is a 'weakness'. But without the maternal and nurturing love of mothers for their children, the whole human race would go extinct. So the human race still survives in spite of the way patriarchy ridicules the role of women. A world totally dominated by masculine men would destroy itself, as we see today with the USA and Russia threatening nuclear war. It is only the influence of the feminine that keeps our world from falling apart. 

 

When we respect and appreciate the power of loving women, we can live in a caring and loving world. When we no longer appreciate and respect women and think the masculine can solve our problems is when we live in a world of conflict, hate, fear, violence, war and chaos. Like we are doing today.   William

 

From Pete: Brilliantly said, William.  The idea that femininity is a weakness or passive is all part of the patriarchy Big Lie.  In reality, true feminine energy is quite fierce and potent, which is why patriarchy fears it so much.

 

 

Taking about Victoria, she comes from a the house of Hanover who were a strange family and had terrible parenting skills. The parents would treat their children so badly that the sons of each King would deeply hate their fathers but still do the same to their children. Because of the abusive childhoods, the early British Hanover Kings were all a bit mad and George 3 was the worse. Fortunately, they didn’t have absolute power as the British parliament was more powerful. 

 

Victoria broke this chain of abuse, so although her parenting skill were still very bad, they were still a lot better than what had gone on before.  She too had a terrible childhood but she wasn’t as cruel to her children in the way she was abused as a child. This allowed change and so that the parenting skills of the modern royal family is more like that of normal people.  

William

 

From Rasa:

What kind of parenting skills do you speak of re Victoria?  In the documentaries I saw it showed little of this, mostly abut Albert dominating her, then her relationships with John Brown & the Hindu in later life - she was a Cougar of sorts.

 

What kind of parenting abuse are we talking about?  Wasn't Charles beheaded for killing his own people?  I need to see the documentaries on that. 

 

 I just saw a documentary about the Dukes of Britain & 2 of them were insane, were put into mental hospitals for the rest of their lives - brothers - the same family. 

Look below:  A dog found a DISCARDED BABY & brought it to his people!

Also just saw documentaries on Louis XVI, who got himself & Marie beheaded - & I guess their whole court & most of it.  Made me pity him as OK, will discuss that later....also last night saw a documentary on 'The Sun King' Luis XIV, who built Versailles.  What a selfish, ego maniacal, disgusting person.  He & the next guy I guess brought on the fall of the Monarchy, they were so selfish.  Didn't care of iota about the people - but do you think the monarchs of Britain do today?  No they don't.  They are doing a lot of promotion to make sure they don't get beheaded, that is all.  But they are trillionaires.  How could Charles buy a villa for Camilla that costs 45 million pounds?  And has 2k acres?  His giving to taxes is VOLUNTARY - hahaha.

 

    What is the PURPOSE of this Monarchy?  I never had any feelings about them until I realized who exactly they are - Personification of Patriarchy.  The ancestors of these people & in some cases in recent times, were Monsters who steal, kill & destroy.  Their progeny now has the money. And when wars are fought, they have something to do with the killing, stealing, plundering.  Victoria had a lot to do with politics although it's said they aren't supposed to be involved.  She was best friends with Disraeli, made him a Lord so he got her declared EMPRESS OF INDIA.  My ass, if she was the real Empress of India I am the Empress of China. Who the fuck did these English people think they were, taking over & dominating India?  I will have to look into that next, it is baffling to me how they got their feet in the door & then were killing & exploiting the Hindus.

 

    I had a friend who was a professor in Harvard - a young man - who was an expert on India.  I asked him how they got in there & he said THROUGH TRADE.  I must look into that.  I know lots of indigenous people were infiltrated via MISSIONARIES, first the missionaries, then the soldiers, lol.  They get their foot in the door, then take over, exploit & kill. No wonder some indigenous people are doing all they can to keep Westerners off their territories.

 

From William Bond:  Hi Rasa

I don't know the details but from the time of George 1 to William 4 every Hanoverian king had a deep hatred for their father. Victoria it seems was a 'control freak' and tried to control her children's lives even when they were adults, but it seems she wasn't so bad that her children hated her, like in the Hanoverian family of previous generations. 

 

I'm not sure about Albert dominating Victoria, he did try to do this but she fought back and gave him a hard time and didn't allow him to become 'king'. (This happened also to Elizabeth 2, Prince Phillip her husband also tried to dominate her but again she stood up for herself and didn't allow him to take over.)

 

As for the conquest of India, this was done by the East Indian Company, which was then the largest company in the world. They did it by trade and bribing Indian rulers, they also got involved in wars between various Indian rulers and used these disputes to increase their power and influence. The East Indian Company, at first, kept missionaries out of India but a law passed in Britain allowed them in and they caused so much trouble in India, which resulted in the Indian mutiny. The mutiny was put down and then the British Government took over India and the East Indian Company was pushed out. The Indians far preferred being ruled by the East Indian Company than the later British rulers after the mutiny. 

 

The point is that Britain is a small island and didn't have a vast army to conquer the world, so it acquired an Empire by more stealthy means with the help of advance technology. Having lived in Australia I am aware of how badly British settlers treated the Aboriginal population. The Māori in New Zealand did a lot better because they were better fighters and took on the British army and so the British settlers made peace with them.     William

 

Response to a letter from William on why the wicked get all the publicity while the good seem boring:

 

Indeed the crazies, evil & cruel make for more interesting reading.  But the good should also be emphasized.  I once read lives of Saints - hundreds of them - & was in awe of all they did.  We need more of that.  But yes, how many saints living have we met, who've done extraordinary things?  Can you name some & all their remarkable deeds?  Living, breathing ones that you knew, who did healings, miracles & etc.  How many?  That is what is wrong - we hardly know any.  My Dad was a 'little saint' - He spent 2 yrs. 9 months in Purgatory so that is not one without sin.  And my good husband spent about a year in Purgatory even though, at my request, he left 8k for Masses for the Souls in his will.  And I said Gregorian Masses for him - 30 in a row - even so, he did not have a super short Purgatory.  Had nothing been done for him he might have spent 3 years there.

 

And that might be our problem regarding writing accounts of lives & biographies.  Our lives are filled with so much dirty lowlifes, scum bags, rapists, exploiters, traitors, etc. rather than the good.  If we had GREAT SAINTS in our lives, as I said, it WOULD BE INTERESTING! 

But I have known only LITTLE saints in my life, they did nothing like the great saints did, so yes, they did decent things, mostly my husband because he was IN LOVE WITH MY BODY so it was not UNCONDITIONAL.

 

What can I do?  Write a whole book on people that DID NOT HURT ME?  Just go on & on like a drone, 'Oh, he didn't hurt me - oh, she was nice - oh, she did the right thing - oh, she was OK.....Indeed, that would be kind of BORING would it not?

 

And I did not WANT or ASK for cruelty, abuse, being used, raped, exploited etc.  No I did not enjoy it, like it or desire it.     Rasa

 

It's mostly about DRAMA, isn't it?  Jesus life was DRAMATIC.  His healings, miracles were DRAMATIC.  Stories need DRAMA.  If Jesus had been 'just a nice guy' & done nothing DRAMATIC we wouldn't even know about him, there would have been no accounts.  It was the drama that got him & his life famous.

 

And murderers are spoken of constantly.  How many accounts are there of the workings of Henry VIII?  Holy cow, how many books & documentaries on him?  How many books on the tyrants & evil doers & murderers?  Untold numbers, because it was DRAMA.   People react to DRAMA.     Rasa

I saw a lot of films recently re Queen Victoria & have been channeling her for days.  Will give an account of her statements soon.  It opens the eyes as to the entire mentality of these 'elites' - those who control the world for their own benefit.  They are monsters.  They are LUCKY if they escape Hell.  And yet, in all the documentaries I saw on her - about 6 or 7 - not one BAD WORD is said against her.  The only questions they raise are did she really have SEX with John Brown? {Found out he was 6' to her 5'2" her waist 48" - lol - She was a COUGAR.}  Like this is ULTRA EMPORTANT.  And her last Hindu slave, the 6'2" tall movie star looking 24 yr old male who attended to her full time - What was gong on with him?  This is all these accounts care about, not the BIG PICTURE of why did she NOT HELP THE POOR?  They had the famous work house system then, notorious.  She did NOTHING about it.  The accounts of her life are OBSCENE SELFISHNESS & NARCISSISM & she admits to it.   Rasa

 

Response to a later letter from Pete

Well-said, Rasa.  Indeed, most people are not good.  They are not necessarily evil (though many clearly are), but most are neutral and self-interested at best.  Whether it is nature, nurture, or perhaps a bit of both, I am not sure.  There are some good arguments for both, I think.

 

Evil is not a majority in itself, but when combined with the easily-swayed neutrals and blanks, they then effectively outnumber the good, unfortunately.  Neutrals and blanks tend to take the path of least resistance, which too often means siding with evil whenever evil is in power. Probably about one-third or people are at least marginally good, one-third evil, and the remaining third some shade of neutral. And this has basically been true for practically all of recorded history, or for at least as long as patriarchy has existed.  These proportions really have not changed very much over time, it seems. 

From Rasa:   Excellent synopsis Pete. 

 It also goes with what Queen Victoria has been saying to me {with her mind} as I channel - That the majority of people who honor her, if they had her position, would be exactly like her - consummately selfish, egotistical, proud, vain, etc.

 

I heard some excerpts from Machiavelli's Prince recently & the host which was quoting him said, "This is you & me."  He had human nature down to a peg.     Rasa

 

From William

As many people have pointed out human beings are sheep and are easy indoctrinated and brainwashed. So if we are sold the idea that humans are basically cruel, selfish and violent then that is the way we become. The heroes of our patriarchal world are men of violence, like soldiers, policemen, cowboys and even criminals are turned into a type of hero. 

 

Caring people like nurses and care-workers are underpaid and overworked. Without mothers who devote their lives to giving birth and bring up children the human species would go extinct. So as a society we seem to admire violent men more than caring women and it is not surprising we live in a violence and chaotic world, because of this.    William

 

Rasa says:  William – History is written by MEN. You have to seek alternative media to find women’s POV, what they did, & what matters to them