Some disagreement with Miles

tags:  meta-info   —   by Gerry · Feb 2020 · 1006 words

I consider Miles Mathis to be the greatest & most important researcher of our time. Nonetheless, I disagree with him on some details, which I’ll list here.

Minor disagreements

I think all my points of disagreement are relatively minor details, and not very important. To me, it’s mostly differences in emphasis. Like all of us truthers, I owe Miles big time, and I agree with him on almost all of his findings, especially since he’s laid it all out for us in minute detail with proofs & references. And also because I have researched cases he didn’t mention, and could confirm Miles’ findings every time.

I still list these points here. First, because my research is built on Miles’, so I don’t want people to think I’m contradicting myself. Second, because what I think is unimportant could be important to you, especially if you’re religious.

In all these points, I may later turn out to be wrong. But like everyone, I’m biased towards my own opinion. Miles, if you ever read this, I hope you won’t take it personally. For all you others, please make up your own mind. Maybe there’s even a convergence of ideas down the road.


Miles has famously proven that our cryptocratic overlords frequently name & style themselves as “Jews”. Most truthers, true & faux, either ignore this fact or go overboard and blackwash it in “Protocols of Zion” style. Miles didn’t fall into either of those pitfalls. He discovered that those self-styled “Jews” are not religious at all, but anti-religious. He also found out that those “Jews” are not underdogs, but aristocrats, very often in the British peerage.

However, Miles still seems to think that the cryptocrats are to some degree Jews in the textbook sense, that scripture like Sefer Torah & Talmud hold some value for them, and that they somehow came to power in Biblical times.

I disagree with that. Now some lesser spooklings may not be clued in on the full truth. But I think the literal contents of religious texts hold no value for true upper-level cryptocrats. I think these texts are encoded recipes for deception, and enjoyed only for their pun factor. I also think that Bible stories are mostly parables on spookery, not actual history. I’ve also come to think the spooks did not come to power in Biblical times, but rather came from power already. Only the system of ruling shifted.

As proof, I encourage you to browse my analyses on:

I agree with Miles, however, that there is no “other entity” behind “ze Jews”. We only disagree on what this “Jew” identity ultimately means. In my texts, I therefore tend not to use the word “Jew” or put it in quotes, because it’s very easy misunderstood to mean actual, religious Jews.

For further discussion, please see my disclaimer on Judaism.


Miles has discovered that there’s an ongoing spook campaign to destroy religions, particularly Christianity. Miles also correctly assumes that this is because the society based on Christian values is to be replaced with something nasty. I totally agree with both findings.

However, I disagree with what this means for the origins of Christianity, and religions in general. I fear that every institutionalized religion has always been a tool of the rich & powerful, from the moment it was instituted, and possibly before, when it was inofficially instituted. Jewish scripture is full of spook puns. I allege the same is true for all religions, including Christianity. The difference is that Christianity was used for a mass religion, is therefore more toned down, and we lack the original text for full analysis.

Miles has always defended letter & spirit of Christianity. I will only defend the spirit, but not the texts, names & symbolism. Anything else would shield the ancient spookery that’s hidden there. I think clinging not to the Christian spirit, but to the texts & symbols will not be a big help in saving it either way.

If you disagree with my view, please don’t take it out on Miles, because he does not share my view.

For further discussion, please see my disclaimer on religions.

Deadly enmity among aristocrats

Another big field where I disagree with Miles are those stories where history tells us aristocrats assassinated each other, or ancient empires fought each other. Miles has proven very often for recent history, and even medieval history, that assassinations & wars were faked & manufactured, and that both involved parties were actually allies & relatives.

However, every now and then, Miles encounters a historical account of an assassination or war, and assumes it was genuine. I don’t somehow, ever. Because I came late to the party and read so much of Miles’ research, I now assume that all famous accounts of deadly enmity within the aristocracy are lies by default, until proven otherwise.

Of course there are rivalries, and overlapping factions, and regional takeovers of some sort, and it’s very important that we find out how those work in detail. But if there were any real fights “to the death” among aristocrats, they would long ago have tried to rally their subjects by telling us more about the truth. They didn’t. So I think whatever goes on behind the scenes can’t be too physically dangerous to them.

This question becomes important when analyzing ancient empires from Biblical times and before. For example, many truthers still believe the Egyptians, Persians & Romans were enemies of “ze Jews”, because the Bible says so. But I have analyzed the Hebrew text, and think that the Book of Esther is a parable, and that Egypt is spooky codespeak for “the slaves”. I haven’t yet proven this for each & every “enemy” empire, but since all modern cases are fake, and the most famous ancient cases are fake, I’ll assume this as a default.

tags:  meta-info