Robert Sepehr documentaries on Youtube
This video explores a very important topic, the sad change that occurred in our civilisation when female sexuality and the-woman-as-an-independent-sexual-being stopped being seen as a valuable and important part of our society. Instead, it became something regarded as sordid and unclean, something to be treated with contempt. This was a bizarre change. Why did several of the major Western Religions at that time in our history decide to officially view sexually confident and independent women as a menace, a sin and deserving of contempt and punishment?
For countless millennia before this chance, hunter-gatherer societies were almost always respectful of and valued the goddess-figure, a woman both strong, caring and sexually confident. And yet when two of our main Western Religions came to prominence; Catholicism and Islam, they both brought with them a completely different view, that women should not be free to sexually express themselves and they should effectively instead become the possession of the men and never be given the role of high priest, leader or simply independent individual.
Why would the male leaders of these religions be so keen to denigrate women and marginalise their role in society? I realised a while back that there is one possibility, that the early Roman bishops didn't care about women because they gained their sexual enjoyment from men and boys. This would not have been shock at the time. Such a lifestyle was an established part of Ancient Greek society, where it was considered normal for adult men to have sexual affairs with boys as young as eight. If those religious leaders did have such a lifestyle, then their sexual disinterest in women would have made it much easier for the majority of them to view women as harlots, temptresses, unclean and fundamentally sinful. Was this what happened? It's hard to tell, but two thousand years of institutionalised misogyny and the epidemic of paedophilia cases amongst the clergy seem to support this possibility.
There are a lot of articles on the web about the Rothschild family. Accusations made about them and their power are probably the number one 'conspiracy theory' topic on the internet. And yet the key evidence for the Rothschild's enormous wealth, power and influence is clear and an established part of our modern history. As the above documentary points out, The Balfour declaration shows that the Rothschild family had enormous influence over the political decisions of the United States. This isn't that surprising, since there is historical evidence that attests, through financial records and share-ownership, that the Morgans and Rockefellers were effectively U.S. representatives of the Rothschild family. Those families, in turn, ever since the founding of the United States in the late eighteenth century, have exerted huge influence over the U.S. government and its presidents.
The video also hints at another alliance that may have dominated the Western World for the last three centuries, an alliance between Zionists and Freemasons. Such an alliance seems strange at first sight, as the two groups seem markedly different, but it can make more sense if one remembers that Yahweh was originally a god in Egypt. Since Freemasonry is largely based on Egyptian religions and spiritual thought, it is possible that the right-wing Freemasons may see Zionists as sharing similar views to them. If such a group formed an alliance with the Zionists, it would be an immensely powerful combination. Sadly, it would also be highly undemocratic.
I've been interested in the Book of Enoch for a long time now. It is, perhaps, the most important and most revealing of all the apocryphal texts that the early Roman Catholic Church tries to destroy. The Book of Enoch makes it clear who the 'sons of god' actually were, and their relationship to the Nephilim or Giants. The book also shows these gods and angels to be far from angelic, which explains why the Church tried so hard to eradicate all its copies.
There is a lot of evidence, worldwide, that counters the official line that civilisation started almost magically from scratch in 4000 BC. The presence of Caucasian people in the Americas, long before Columbus turned up, is widespread, as well as evidence of Caucasians in the Polynesian islands. The recent scientific discovery of homo sapiens in a cave in Morocco, dated to 300,000BC, along with an even more recent find in Israel, dating to 120,000 BC, indicates that anatomically modern humans were active on our planet for far longer than we're officially told. If modern humans were around 300,000 years ago, then it is inevitable, considering our brain size and tool-use, that we would have developed civilisation long before 4000 BC, at least as far back as during our last ice-age.
The possibility that human civilisations existed in our last ice-age is an exciting idea. It's also exciting that some people from these ancient civilisations survived the end of our last ice-age and formed new colonies around the globe. I think the Cloud People of Peru may be a particularly interesting example of this hidden history, especially as their art style is uncannily similar to the Cycladic, pre-Minoan civilisations of The Mediterranean. Robert Sepehr has made documentaries about them, along with other documentaries on the interesting genetic links between the Basques, the indigenous groups of Ireland, the Cloud People and the strange, blue-eyed Pharaohs. Fascinating stuff!