The Review of Value

The Review of Value>>>

The recent death of Terry Jones can't be allowed to pass without mention of 1 small corner of his work. No, not "The lifetime of Brian," but the heavily researched and very accurate book "Who Murdered Chaucer?"

Few are going to be unaware that Chaucer was the very greatest of the first storytellers within the English, and few will deny his writings have a strong political bite. Under the reign of Richard II Chaucer was quite tolerated, regardless of the discomfiture of conservative, authoritarian and regularly corrupt figures in Church and State. Terry Jones tells the story of how the longer-term Henry IV was corrupted and depraved by the exiled archbishop of Canterbury, Thomas Arundel. With the archbishop's help, Henry usurped and murdered King Richard.

With his royal protector gone Chaucer sought sanctuary but shortly after taking it he mysteriously disappeared.

Historians wish to portray Richard II as a weak and petulant king, and thus Henry because of the savior of the state. Needless to mention the facts of history don't support this.

As a toddler, Richard rushed up to the remaining leaders of the Peasants' Revolt, after the murder of their chief leader Watt Tyler, and declared "I am your leader now." From Terry Jones' work, we will believe he meant it.

Thus History has been stood on its head, the great declared weak and therefore the evil declared heroic. Terry Jones has corrected this. Has his great work been acclaimed? Seriously, what does one think?

If such a celebrated figure so struggles to shift academic opinion what hope is there for the remainder of us?

What draws a book to public attention? Is it hidden funding for promotion, being 'on the song' with political correctitude, or reviews in major media publications? of 1 thing you'll make certain, it's not the worth or the reality of the content.

Another writer, of an incredible scholarship, application, and fluency, made a promise to the spirit of Our Lady of Walsingham. He promised to spot truth founding father of the shrine where numerous miracles, beyond counting, are attested over what's now nearly a thousand years. It had been accepted by historians, on little or no evidence, that the shrine was founded by an obscure Norman gentlewoman, a while after the Conquest. What Bill Flint found, from a careful reading of Doomsday Book also as many other sources, was truth founder. She was Edith the Rich and Fair, granddaughter of Canute, niece of Edward the Confessor and wife of Harrold II. The Shrine to Our Lady of Walsingham was first and foremost a royal shrine, with nothing to try to to with folk superstitions or village wise women.

 How could the consensus of historians make such a crass and ignorant mistake? Yet does one think the Catholic Church or C. of E. or any university has made any acknowledgment to the memory of Bill Flint? in fact not. The royal point remains stronger once you fast forward to the Reformation when Henry VIII attacked the Shrine's statue of Mary Mary with ax and fire; a petulant brat getting to war against God. The standing of Henry VIII has skilled downward revision lately, but does one think any of the writers on the topic gave credit to Bill Flint? in any case, Edith the Fair wasn't on the NY Times trade book list.

Disregard of truth and value in favor of conservative Establishment approval, to not mention the funding which can accompany that approval, isn't confined to history books. allow us to skip the worldwide Warming scam, during which the human arrogance hubris and corruption of governments, anxious to require yet greater powers over their populations, beggars belief.

 Consider three banned TED talks, one each by Graham Hancock, Russell Targ and Rupert Sheldrake; each of them towering and World-renowned figures, Sheldrake alone being a meticulous and really senior university research fellow. the rationale they were banned is, each of them, in their own field, utterly discredited the establishment 'facts' and beliefs.

Graham Hancock's banned talk, "The War on Consciousness," acknowledged the prehistoric discovery of hallucinogenic drugs coincided with an excellent breakthrough in human consciousness. However, he's better known for his theories of worldwide cataclysms within the prehistoric period, these are proved to be correct; thus casting a completely new light on the origins and chronology of Ancient Egypt; incidentally, a flavor of this was first revealed to the Greek student and Lawgiver Solon and later reported by Plato, now quite famous, despite being for several centuries denied by academics.

 Hancock's discoveries demonstrate Ancient Egypt was a survivor or descendant of a civilization much above we've now, which came from human conscious the maximum amount above ours as ours is above the lower animals. apart from reducing the entire official Egyptology to the worth of 'snake oil,' these links alright with "The War on Consciousness."
Russell Targ was a senior figure in U.S. federal remote viewing projects, yet governments and official media would really like to ridicule remote viewing as impossible, despite the very fact that it's been widely practiced for thousands of years and is an innate human capability.
One good result of a banned TED talk came from Rupert Sheldrake's mild, unassuming and utterly devastating response to the banning of his disproof of 'scientific' dogmas, "The Science Delusion," it had been the ultimate death of Richard Dawkins' reputation as a philosopher of science.

Other attacks by corrupt and truth denying authorities on those of real ability have made the names and global reputations of, especially, Profs. Peter Ridd and Jordan Peterson; perhaps we should always add the name of David Icke, banned from entering Australia.

The list of inferior but powerful people and organizations (organizations are the worst because they sink to rock bottom common denominator) is endless. you discover them in every field of the act, seeking to regulate everyone but themselves. Their powers of the invention of justifications for this behavior are endless but rarely supported truth or maybe facts. I conclude what drives people to such counterproductive behavior may be a secret belief in their own inadequacy, after all, if they were actually capable of doing something useful wouldn't they only get on and do it?

Terry Jones just did get on and do things. Capable of great focus and discipline, he could handle evidence at the foremost rigorous level, and yet act with the best fluency and ease. These characteristics are complementary, not contradictory. an extra and heartening outcome of "Who Murdered Chaucer," it points out that evil rulers and members of the state are deceiving and betraying those they rule for 6 centuries and more. Perhaps now we'll start to point out up and disgrace these deceivers quite we wont to do. All that it takes is for truthful people to talk out, whether or not they be rich and famous or not.

Terry Jones did speak out, in History, in Comedy, and in life. the best credit goes to those that follow his example.
He is going to be greatly missed.