Skip to main content

Ronald Bernard of the B of Joy on Child Sacrifices and the Protocols of the Elders of Zion

A series of interviews has been making the rounds on conspiracy websites in which Dutchman Ronald Bernard talks about a sinister elite of about 8000 Luciferians who rule our world. According to Bernard, he was involved in all kind of financial services for this elite. He crashed emotionally and physically when he was invited to participate in child sacrifices, which take part during their satanic ceremonies.

Nowadays, Bernard is trying to make the world a better place, for instance with his B of Joy, a grassroots initiative which aims to be “a full reserve, interest-free, community bank”, “based on good stewardship of all life.” Bernard also encourages his listeners, however, to read the infamous and antisemitic Protocols of the Elders of Zion, which he apparently sees as a blueprint that is getting implemented in our lifetime.

“Dutch Illuminati Banker blows the Whistle”

Three parts (out of five) have been published online at this moment. They are made by Irma Schiffers, who last year co-founded Dutch website, Coöperatie De Vrije Media, which brings the usual conspiracy theories and anti-vaccine propaganda. Only the first part was published on that website, as she recently decided to go her own way.

You can have a look at his bizarre story yourself, but don’t expect any proof as he delivers nothing as such, we are expected to believe him prima facie. The most bizarre statements are in part 1, at about 22:50 the insane story on the Luciferians starts, and at about 29:15 you can here him on the Protocols.

Image via ‘Geheugen van Nederland

Is Bernard an antisemite or ‘just’ a crank?

Fellow skeptic Frank Verhoft from Belgium visited one of Bernard’s presentations in June this year and wrote on about it on his weblog. Verhoft noticed that Bernard used an image of the cover of a Dutch translation of the Protocols. In his presentation, Bernard had cut off the top of the cover which made it a bit of a search to find where he got it from. Verhoft found out that is was published in a series by De Misthoorn, according to Wikipedia “probably the most aggressive antisemitic magazine ever published in the Netherlands.”

lecture from 2016 also contains elements which you could consider antisemitic. Bernard mentions the ‘Waterloo legend’, about the Jewish banking family Rothschild. And at 29:35 he shows a cartoon, which has its roots in extreme right circles. It’s a slightly altered version of a clearly antisemitic cartoon which caused some controversy when the leader of the Austrian far-right party FPÖ shared it on Facebook.

Though this lecture and the interview are laden with conspiracy theories and naive critique on the current banking system, I didn’t find explicit antisemitic remarks. But telling your listeners to take the Protocols seriously without pointing out its dark origins is pretty dubious. Also on Facebook Bernard points his followers to a YouTube video on the Protocols which does not mention they have been proved to be an antisemitic hoax.

Verhoft and I were quite surprised that mainstream media had not yet asked questions. On the contrary, in January this year, Bernard was interviewed by De Volkskrant (one of the main newspapers in the Netherlands) and nothing of all this was mentioned. (Fun fact: this interview was a reason for infamous conspiracy website Infowars to take Bernard seriously.)
A quick look on Bernard Social Media accounts would have learned that he is deep into all kind of conspiracies, from chemtrails, anti-vaccination myths, to believing that climate change is a hoax. Websites like Familieblij.nl and GozoGreenCoop are registered in his name (under his alias Ronald Blij).

Many of the people involved in the B of Joy (or ‘De Blije B’, as is the Dutch name) are easily found spreading the most ridiculous crank ideas as well. Which made me wonder why there were also a couple of people on the advisory board, who you would not likely associate which such ideas.

Academics leaving the International Advisory Board of B of Joy

Before publishing my article (on Kloptdatwel) on Bernard’s interview and the research I did on his background, and that of other people involved, I contacted the two people in the International Advisory Board, who hold academic positions: Jan Rotmans (professor in transitions and transition management at the Erasmus University Rotterdam) and Marleen Janssen Groesbeek (lector Sustainable Finance and Accounting at Avans University of Applied Sciences). Me and Verhoft had repeatedly asked them questions on this matter via Twitter, but they seemed to ignore us (although they did notice our remarks).

In reply to my email, they let me know (clearly annoyed by my questions) that they didn’t believe anything of the stories told by Bernard. But apparently, it didn’t seem to bother them too much as they both continued to support the B of Joy.
After the publication of my article, however, other journalists got interested as well.  And only now Rotmans and Janssen Groesbeek decided to step down. De Volkskrant (the same newspaper that had published the uncritical interview with Bernard in January this year) wrote about the matter on Saturday, August 26th 2017 and apparently, this attention made them take the wise decision to cut ties with the B of Joy and Bernard in the end.

Fake news on the death of Bernard

The third part of the interview was released August 22nd, just a couple of days after I published my article on Kloptdatwel. In this part, Bernard responds to some critical remarks (from other conspiracy websites) on the previously released videos. Mainly on the fact that he didn’t show any proof whatsoever that he was indeed involved in financial operations during 1982-1994. The people who dare question his story because of the lack of proof or a curriculum vitae are just “hufters” (=bastards) according to Bernard. He also adds more incredible stories, about illegal (child) organ trade, in which Dutch nurses would have been involved in the late ’70s.

On August 24th fake news website Newspunch brought this story: Ronald Bernard, Dutch Banker Who Exposed Illuminati, Found Dead, in which the author states that this ‘former Illuminati banker’ had been found dead in Florida. Although in the comments under this article it was quickly pointed out that this dead man had the name Ronald Bernard Fernandez (Ronald and Bernard being his first names) and that this is a completely different person who was found dead in July, this story makes the rounds these days on many conspiracy sites and is bound to become a classic (“Illuminati banker found dead after blowing the whistle on child sacrifices”).

Did you enjoy this article? Then please consider to support my blog with a donation.

85 thoughts to “Ronald Bernard of the B of Joy on Child Sacrifices and the Protocols of the Elders of Zion”

  1. And then came the Epstein pedophilia ring to confirm Ronald Bernard’s allegations.

    [PvE: deleted some links to irrelevant news articles on the Epstein case, and self-promoting spam]

    1. For someone who calls himself professor, you seem to hold a pretty low standard for what can be taken as confirmation of extraordinary claims.

      As I responded to another comment in this thread: “Unfortunately bad things happen to children and minors all the time, sometimes wealthy people like Epstein are involved and manage to avoid proper Justice for a long time. But that’s still nowhere near what Bernard (and others) make up about Luciferian elitists.”

  2. “Bernard” was most certainly involved in banking but sadly- as a convicted fraudster who was arrested in 1992 after ripping of the SNS Bank of The Netherlands. “Bernard”, or as he was called then Dirk Duselldorp ( he used to claim he was related to Dick Dusseldorp who went to Australia in the 1950s and made a fortune on behalf of the Dutch Royal Family). He was jailed for 9 months as a minor character in the gang. I guess he’s graduated to bigger things now and more experienced but if you send him money for his “bank” don’t come moaning when it all evaporates into thin air. It’s just pathetic how these con merchants know how to press the buttons of people but child abuse is one. And people fall for it every time.

    1. Do you have any sources you can share that corroborate this? I did some searches on the web (and digital newspaper archives) for ‘Dirk Dusseldorp’ but couldn’t find anything.

  3. You’re protecting someone or something. You offer no evidence yourself and jump around finally citing his death story as proof it’s all fake. In investigations people will get things wrong, that doesn’t mean it’s all wrong. This is a classic example of what happens online. Snopes is famous for this. The ignorant will come here, read it and think it’s another conspiracy which it isn’t. Finally if you connect the dots globally and look at all the pedophile stories, child sacrifice stories, suicides, arkancides, etc. from Epstein on down they can’t all be BS. For decades these stories have been told. This is far easier to prove than bigfoot or UFOs. It’s happening yet nobody is doing anything, it’s all conspiracy and bigfoot gets more press. Stop protecting these SOBs.

    1. Unfortunately bad things happen to children and minors all the time, sometimes wealthy people like Epstein are involved and manage to avoid proper Justice for a long time. But that’s still nowhere near what Bernard (and others) make up about Luciferian elitists.

      And it seems you completely misread what I wrote about the fake news on Bernard’s death. It’s just s story by someone trying to pick up some traffic alongside the attention the interviews generated.

  4. I think it is great the way you work to get through this charlatans stories. And I’m sad that there are actually people that don’t think they need proof. To me the moment he started going into conspiracy mode my alarmbells went off. Up to then it was all an unverifiable story, a bit fantastic and pointless.
    This man claims he was a very big financial player, but to set up a new bank he needs funding from everyday ordinary people? That doesn’t make any sense at all.

    1. There are more killings by sects or cults, some of which might have people involved who have connections to influential people in society (who are not part of these sects or cults themselves). You could also mention Charles Manson. This all doesn’t make the claim of Bernard that there is an elite satanistic network of 8000 Luciferians, which more or less runs the world behind the scenes and is involved in ritual killings, more plausible.

  5. PEPIJN,

    What kind of evidence would satisfy you? There are many testimonies from different people all over the globe who share the same elements. Many of these people speak of being abused at a very young age, many talk about a network of powerful people, secret services, churches and government, many speak of military experiments, and many speak of these rituals where living beings are killed. Every year we have new witnesses who virtually say very similar things. In normal criminal cases, a testimony that sounds credible would be investigated by the police. But in this case, the aberration is that the majority of people discount these testimonies prima facie and proper investigations are rarely conducted. I think you know, like many of us, that there is truth in these testimonies, but you are simply not willing to face the consequences. This just reflects a lack of moral courage.

    1. To start with, Bernard could give some real information on the corporations he claims to have worked for. Now there is nothing that can be checked about his whereabouts in those years. Nobody can live such a life without leaving verifiable facts.

      1. I saw this on the Imperium you tube video – part 2, and I think his account seems completely credible. He wasn’t trying to give specific details, or convince anyone — it wasn’t a court case, it was rather an overview of the whole business. And if you watch the whole imperium tale, (over 4 hours), it becomes clear that anyone giving any info whatsoever, or even investigating, gets killed!

        1. Don’t you think that that is a pretty lame excuse for not giving any verifiable info? He is not even giving any hard information about the periods before and after his alleged involvement with these Luciferians.

      2. Pepin
        You’re absolutely wrong. I don’t know is Bernard is antisemitic (and honestly, I don’t care about it). But there is more evidence than you even could be know in your restrictive personal world. I’m sure you don’t know spanish, but this documentary shows real testimonies from child sacrifices in Spain, made for politics involved in a pedophile net:

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bzBug8_otuY

        You can see testimonies, documents, law demands and more. Perhaps you would need a video clip to be completely sure. But it would be absolutely insane.

        In this world, child sacrifices are an horrible reality. If you need real proofs, make a sacrifice for all of us: Get involved, asking directly to police, politics and other authorities about this kind of facts: In some time your life will go under risk. For sure! (Belgium is a good place to start) Leave your stupid “blog research style” and begin make real research.

        1. As far as I’m able to find information about this case, I understand this is being investigated. Even if the accusations in the most far-fetched versions are found to be true, it doesn’t point to an elite satanistic network of 8000 Luciferians like Bernard claims exists.

        2. This is a good example to prove that this is really happening, and have always happened. I know people in Spain from the place where this event took place and most of them are truly convinced of the truth and who were really involved. There isnt much to do against it, as it involves powerfull figures.

          In Bernard’s case he doesn’t need to give any details, why would he even mention something like that if it wouldn’t be true?
          there’s always someone that will try to prove wrong, obviously there’s a big interest to keep this out of our sight and big names are involved, messing up with this is not a joke.

          On the other hand, I also understand that people might seek for names, places and dates that would prove it. Sadly we are not really sure what is disinformation and what isn’t anymore, it’s very difficult to trust the sources nowadays.

  6. I’ve received quite a number of comments on this post, which I’ve kept in moderation, because there either off-topic, antisemitic, pointing to other hoax stories on ritualistic child abuse, or just plain stupid.

    Remarks similar to:

    “Have you actually studied what is written in the Jewish writings? Because there are horrible things mentioned in those” or references to Moloch.

    Such remarks simply do not make it more trustworthy hat the events Bernard describes actually took place. These writings might, however, be one of the sources for his fantasy, but it seems more likely that he just rehashed similar stories on satanistic child abuse that popped up in the eighties and nineties in talk shows and were also never found to be true.

    Also spare yourself the effort to leave remarks that “you can just see that Bernard is telling the truth”, as there are already enough similar silly statements in these comments.

    1. Proof, facts, evidence, a trustworthy testimony?

      It’s rather irrelevant don’t you think?

      In this world we exist in, to dispute something is easy, when it comes to human interactions. To prove it is impossible. That is the nature of any formal situation dictated within the unlimited variables of life we live in.

      To imply there is good evidence is to imply that no evidence can be challenged, invalidated, or discredited by honest or dishonest means.

      If you can admit we are human and prone to error, then you cannot aske for proof to the contrary.

      Knowing that we are all prone to error is to say that no evidence is beyond human error. Therefore, evidence in itself proves nothing.

      What evidence in this day and age cannot be fabricated, altered or mishandled? A picture? A video? A document? An internet post? A witness account?

      This is not a math test or purposely divised game where rules are made and structured to maintain order within a simple structured system that is far beneath the full reality of our existence. Is it possible for a person to cheat at a game or a test? The answer tells us that if we cannot ensure order within a simple game or test then how do we expect to ensure absolute proof within real life with all its complexities? And if one piece of evidence can faked or flawed then all of it can.

      Everything in this natural, real world we live in requires faith or beleif in what can’t be proven when it comes to matters of human interaction and testimony.

      To expect any different is to imply you are either insane, ignorant or purposely misleading. I wonder which it is?

      Believe Mr. Bernard’s testimony or don’t. Ultimately it’s a choice based on faith and your own perspective. Believe good and evil exist or don’t. The rest is just a distraction. “Fake News”, “Real News”, it’s all subjective really. It’s what you want to believe that matters to you.

      Maybe one of us was with Mr. Bernard at any time during his experience described, and can support or deny his claims? Looks like the only real proof we have is his testimony. If you choose to believe it?

  7. As there’s nothing to find on Ronald Blij perhaps you could look for Stephanie B. Blij who is associated with him on Facebook? Not sure what the relationship is.
    She’s promoting him openly on Facebook so I don’t think it’s unethical to check her out. I just can’t speak or read Dutch!

  8. It is naive to think that there can be a limit to evil. For people who have political and financial power to such an extent that they can almost just do what they want without accountability, any of these “conspiracies” might well be true. I would say, you still left us in the air, rather investigate this more until you find your proof.

      1. Interesting point and merit to it. He did say however ( interview child abuse enquiry London) that he at some stage signed non revelation agreenent and is merely holding to it. People would probably find it incredulous and outlandish anyway, so not much would be gained by it. Read Paul to Ephesions 6 12 ( Christian community Catholic pastoral edition)

      2. He probably will… the story is only just unfolding.
        Have patience mate.
        Not all his aces are on the table yet.
        In fact,the question should be asked
        “What EXACTLY do you consider to be reasonable ‘proof’?”
        That way, he doesn’t have to waste any time or resources and just get right down to posting his family iPhone snapchat pics of meeting with the Dark Lords.

      3. What kind of proof would satisfy you, blood? I have seen countless testimonies from victims, their families and those who previously held high positions in power such as Ronald (ex CIA, FBI etc). His stories are not far-fetched at all, in my opinion. The powers that be are awash with sadistic satanists who rape, torture and murder children and babies as a matter of routine ritual. I live in England and are so called royal family are notorious for it, and Jimmy Savile was very close friends with the family (he offered them a ready supply of children). Ex prime minister Edward Heath was also notorious for raping children he abducted from childrens homes, before throwing them into the sea to die. I would strongly urge you to do your own research before attacking whistleblowers.

        1. The fact that these stories have common elements, but no actual proof whatsoever could very well show that the people who tell these stories are influenced by each other, borrow elements from them.
          I’ll bet you have no proof for the claims you make. What for instance is your proof that Saville offered the royal family “a ready supply of children”?
          As long as Bernard cannot back up his story with some evidence (for instance names of the people he worked for), he’s not a whistleblower, just another storyteller.

  9. It’s so sad how some “Intelligent” people would never believe in such incidents.
    Look into his eyes and you would know he is not lying. Just because you could not google him doesn’t means he is hoax.

    I challenge you to google the relationship/scandal between Rothschild and Titanic. You would never find any article there. For years we have been fooled with iceberg and Jake & Kate’s love story. Go and learn the truth about sinking of Titanic and it’s relation to World Bank establishment.

    1. The main problem with the story of Bernard is the complete lack of proof. So you think you can determine that he is telling the truth by looking in his eyes? Ha, ha. “Yeah, well, you know, that’s just, like, your opinion, man.”

      Conspiracies around the Titanic are all over the place, but off-topic in the comments on this post.

    2. yes, every super-rich banker Illuminati type has twisted, rotten and yellow teeth like Ronald..cannot afford a dentist?

  10. you keep pointing out about having an open mind based on your information your reading of resources technology the media &all media both on the left the right that can easily be manipulated if one is in the position to do so Also we continue to focus on so called jewish question but much of what I’ve seen on this bernard interview includes also the banking financial sector/system which is not discussed .are we ignoring here that there is verifiable proof of what bernard suggests regards the financial sector, this is not new news Regards the jewish question (&not that I discredit this elite group within this race) but are we averse to not noticing there is a higher than proportion of jews descendants up here. Don’t get me wrong I’d also say there is now gradually a higher than proportion of hindu descendants of a certain entrepreneurial caste here as well My own observations point that when it comes to certain communities within a racial group like in the jewish &the hindu example the value of money is their idol is their god & the honing of a craft the accruing of wealth is their most ancient of cultural heritages . & this conditioning let us call this training begins at an early age (I should know) to manipulate irrespective of right of wrong to succeed financially materially in this world is part parcel of such entrepreneurial group types within the racially dividedcommunities. Now whether bernard is misguided or not regards the myth of zionism etc there are nevertheless groups within them the entrepreneurial jews the entrepreneurial hindus that can be seen functioning conclusively as offered by him. All this only validates the proposition that at the high end of the financial monetary sector is the place to win all irrespective of the deceptions the injustices the immorality the unethical grounding from which extreme wealth accedes. Further on from this we are presuming the named bernard is not an alias name but he doesn’t necessarily come across a fake an actor or an actively insincere person That it can be validated the deliberate avoidance of the unavailable information on the internet on him is part parcel of canniness the shrewdness common amongst the elite striving group Yes they may not be so easily discernibly seen Fools we are to think we d find them amongst the masses within the resources of the internet that they may actually control

  11. if it’s true why didn’t he go to the Police? (Protocols also a red flag.)

    1. Because politics has more influence and power that any police service. It would be useless. Go and make a sue against a Rockefeller family member or other like these one. You’ll see the results. There is evidence about this: The case of Mark Doutroux is a good example. This guy was a part of a pedophile net and child sacrifices. Police finds links with belgian politicians. The result was “someone” ordered to stop the investigations:

      https://www.theguardian.com/world/2002/may/05/dutroux.featuresreview

      So, open your eyes, fu***ng farmer and see the world exactly like it is.

      1. The conspiracy theories around Dutroux of him being just a pawn of an elite circle of pedophiles are mostly based on the stories by Regina Louf (also know as ‘witness X1’). Her testimonies have been proven to be inconsistent and wrong. A lot has gone wrong in the investigation by the Belgian police and justice department, but there is no evidence for the wild stories that go around.

        NB this is the last comment of you I let pass moderation if you can’t discuss without swearing.

  12. I would suggest the author spend more time studying .
    A helpful topic for his understanding would be
    The Khazar Jews…who they are, how they came to be, and….
    What happened to the Sephardic Jews of Europe.
    The author of this article is obviously lacking in knowledge of the history of the true Jews, and he ascent of the impostors.
    Mr. Bernard speaks truth.

    1. I don’t see what Bernards fantasies of child sacrifices have to do with Khazar hypothesis of Ashkenazi ancestry, which has been proven to be false in so far it is used to claim that the majority of Ashkenazi Jews are of Khazar origin (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khazar_hypothesis_of_Ashkenazi_ancestry). The Khazar myth is popular amongst anti-semites and anti-zionists as it used as an argument against historical claims on the Israel/Palestine territories.

  13. The ritual slaughter of Christian children by Jews is a old story and it takes several new forms. Bernard gave a new version adapting this lie to the 21. century. The last Progrom in Poland in the city of Kielcze after WWII (1946) was organized by the Catholic Church and deal with the disappearance of a young boy. More than 40 Jews where killed during this Progrom and several days later the boy returned to his parents. He just visited family in another town…as he said.

    1. It was not organizery by The Catholic Church. It was organizery by communist Office od Public Security

  14. I’ve had a look at this man and can’t find out anything about him. If he was as important as he says then where’s the information?
    Is there anyone in Holland who can do some research and find out if he was the ‘entrepreneur’ he claims to have been?
    He’s now becoming popular in certain communities in England and I’m concerned that people are sending him money. Time will tell if he does what he promises to do and starts a proper, legal, cooperative bank or will he run with the money!

    1. It’s indeed hard to find any solid information on the professional career of Bernard from before 2008. In 2003 he was treasurer (and later chairman) of a foundation that was involved in transforming unused office buildings into rooms for students. But that’s about all I could find.

  15. Why are people more concerned with whether a minority, the Jews, are being said to have a conspiracy – than whether it’s true? The false dichotomies presented, to get around the real issues, such as essentially “Is he crazy or just an anti-Semite?” Do you still beat your wife? I’d like an honest assay of this man’s story, not a hyper-focusing on whether or not he holds a deep-seated distrust of Jews. Nobody, and certainly, no group, is above being labeled as vile and immoral. It’s rather preposterous that we, non-Jews, should accept and take for granted that Jews, in fact, should be trusted, and are moral and ethical people.

    1. It’s rather preposterous that we, non-Jews, should accept and take for granted that Jews, in fact, should be trusted, and are moral and ethical people.

      Pointing out false accusation against a (ethnic) minority as racism, or more specfic anti-semitism, has very little to do with stating that people belonging to these groups should be trusted a priori more than any other person.

    2. what proof is there that “gentiles” should be trusted, or are moral and ethical people?
      certainly plenty are not, some may be..probably similar to any other group.like..maybe Jews?

  16. The Protocols of The Elders of Zion are a forgery based on true information, which is why it convinced a lot of influential people such as Hitler and Henry Ford. They were distributed to make it look as if zionist jews were in control of secret societies (such as freemasonry) while it was the other way around. The original text (Dialogues aux enfers entre Montesquieu et Machiavel) on which the protocols are based was written by a freemason who disguised it as a satire.

    Bernard never mentions jews in the videos, but “Luciferians” who are in fact at the top of interconnected secret societies who practice human sacrifice. Obviously, jews don’t do that. The anti-semitic label is used to silence critics because we know all about the horrors of the Holocaust.

    1. If you are so sure that Bernard is right, I guess you can name some of these Luciferians who are at the top?

        1. Bernard doesn’t give any evidence for his story. And then you ask me to prove that what he tells is false? I think Hitchens’s razor is appropriate here: “What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.”

        1. “Sure, if you wanna go missing”

          really? this “Robert Bernard” fantasizer seems to be thriving

    2. but “Luciferians” who are in fact at the top of interconnected secret societies who practice human sacrifice.
      since it’s “in fact” ..show us ONE PIECE Of ‘evidence” ?

  17. We, in Italy, had such a controversy case about a girl who was found read without the blood in his body (1 month after his disappearing), and despite that the authorities are looking for a “normal” murder case (with a scapegoat) without mentioning, never mention, the possibility of a sacrifice.
    Means that this kind of things are existing and are strictly protected, and that is very important to specify and make it clear are not conspiracies but facts.
    Now the question about this case; is this Ronald Bernatd an actor or is not?
    Do change so much?
    We know for sure the bankers acting improperly, and we know that the Italian Lira speculation (something he talking about) was done (Soros Know something about that), then even if he is an actor he is speaking about cold facts, real happenings and we do know that are people who are had enough to provoke a war just for interests, so again do we really need to make questions about conspiracy for this case?

    You may say something about conspiracy if someone claim wasn’t a natural incident what happened in Sweden the 29th Sept., that by chance is coincident with 11/9. But in this case we don’t even need to look about his credibility but instead to verify how many cases are existing like the facts he has exposed.

    1. As Bernard has shown nothing about the experiences he tells about, which can be verified using independent sources, I think it is best to discard it as a fantasy.

      1. If it would be so easy su point out Luciferians, one would think they would be easy to deal with and they would be sentenced long time ago. I think you’re missin the point that Ronald was tortured till the “out of life” experience. Maybe he revealed enough? Or you want to see him crucified to believe him? Does it matter that everything he describes regarding the debt and no other way out is sharp on the target? Does not his explanation makes a perfect sense finally, – why no elite bankers were put in jail? Isn’t this enough of a proof itself? Therefore you are clearly out of touch with the reality and your tries to label Bernard as anti-semitic falls right back into your lap, no matter how hard you try. I would normally leave it there, but your ignorance to Ronakd’s call for the whole humanity to save the children is anti-empathetic not just for Bernards personal experience, but I consider to be cowardly towards humanity in general. Your picking on his proof is so secondary. If you would put the same kind of effort in researching the elite’s pedophile rings, maybe it wouldn’t be so hard to see the truth coming out through the seems.

        In this old documentary you can see how authorities deal with evidence of other people’s evidence of elite’s child’s abuse. It all makes sense why there are so few people talking about it:
        https://youtu.be/pbJc37HmVDM

        1. Thank you Dalia,
          Your so right. This guy’s a disinformation agent or just stupid and has no business doing this. There plenty of evidence that the elite practice satanic ritual abuse and murder. They know how to distract the masses with the royal weddings some movie star stubbed a toe. Look at the Franklin cover up.

        2. So where is this ‘plenty of evidence’? Rumours and fake news are easily spread, I’m not aware of solid evidence of ‘satanic ritual abuse and murder’.

      1. Actually the Franklin child prostitution and abuse allegations are aligned with discernible facts that can be found with open minded investigation. The Wikipedia article takes the most lurid and least provable to debunk them. Not mentioned was that the Washington Times published an article saying the several child prostitutes were given midnight tours of the White House. the allegations were not disputed. Several of the legislators and social workers from the area involved did find the accusers credible. A private investigator, Gary Cardon returning with photographic proof (he had told collaborators) had his plane fall out of the sky, In 1999, one of the accusers Bonacci won a one million dollar lawsuit against Larry King. Bonacci, whose story has never waivered, was compensated for telling the same story that got him convicted of perjury years before. There is much more than you would ever learn from Wikipedia.

        1. I think this story in the Washington Post (that’s a newspaper with higher standards than the Washington Times) sheds a good light on the affair with homosexual prostitutes in the Whiet House: https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/lifestyle/1989/08/01/the-bombshell-that-didnt-explode/ff09cdb0-7d64-428b-8415-a6998b9f0c65/?utm_term=.a29f4be09d04 Don’t know why you suggest that child prostitutes were involved, that’s not in the story of the Washington Times.
          ‘It pays to keep an open mind, but not so open your brains fall out.’

  18. Ronald Bernard is just another person pointing out what is really going on in the world. It does not matter whether one believes it or not. Ultimately the reality of the matter takes its own course and affect everybody, directly or indirectly.
    In order to understand the scale of the problem or even whether it’s true, looking in isolation is self defeating. How can you notice a pattern of the carpet having your head buried in it. Fact is Ronald does not provide any evidence rather talks the evidence is out there. So the issue is not whether his story is true based only on his statement but rather whether there is any indication on what’s really going on?

    [I (PvE) deleted the rest of this comment, because it was standard conspiracy stuff which doesn’t add anything usefull]

  19. Thank you for an interesting overview of the man. Personally I am wary of the use of the term “conspiracy theories” because such terminology is loaded with negative implications that immediately serve to ridicule or lessen the possibility of the issue being true. The authorities/establishment/systems are those who decide what is “conspiracy” and what isn’t, regardless of the plausibility of the theory put forward. It is a very clever way to side-step issues and gain the support of a misinformed public.

    For instance, labeling concerns about vaccines as “conspiracy theories” does nothing to propose an open, intelligent, scientific debate backed by reliable independent data on the subject – which we are not allowed to have – and anybody who questions the official line is labeled a “conspiracy theorist”. The same with so-called climate change or global warming. People find themselves be polarized as either “for” the official line or “against”, with the latter being ridiculed by mainstream media which is clearly owned by individuals and corporations who do not promote freedom of press, nor speech nor even thought.

    What is interesting about Blij’s version is that it does fit various patterns that many already have about the “elite” (the cabal, illuminati, Bilderbergers or whatever…). For anybody who does some work at understanding how the world works will clearly see that money and power are behind most global matters of importance and that everything keeps leading back to a select few groups. Follow the money is an apt method to apply.

    Blij’s talk about Luciferians and sacrificial rituals are strange to say the least. But so are the theories behind quantum physics and lay people don’t dare to question those, as they cannot really not knowing anything about such a science. Equally, people who have not learned about or been involved in the things Blij talks about cannot know anything about those either. Most people simply repeat what they have been conditioned to repeat by the media and similar sources. And those sources are not always, maybe not even often, correct. They lie, mislead and misinform about so many things. E.g. the wars in the Middle East. There were no WMD and the media did not report about the 1/2million Iraqi infants who died as a direct result of US/UK sanctions which Albright (US Secrerary of State) said “was worth it”! There are numerous other examples of misinformation by the media in politics, the environment, health, etc.

    Not all alternative views are correct and some are very strange. e.g. David Icke’s reptiles, and because of that he is ridiculed about so many other things which are clearly quite accurate.

    So… unless we already know, with firm evidence, I do think we should learn to keep our minds open to the possibility that something might be correct, instead of closing our minds and eliminating that possibility forever.

    I find most of Blij’s comments quite likely to be true or at least very close to the truth. And that is something that alerts me and encourages me to ask more questions and look further. I cannot change the world but I can learn to live in a way which is more positive in an effort to balance at least a few of the negative things out there.

    As Edmund Burke said, “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.” (Women too!)

    1. Agree 100% – Pepijn and other self-proclaimed sceptics have no interest in truth, they are just the indoctrinated
      bullies of the authoritarian, arrogant and hateful mainstream.

      1. I prefer to base my ‘truth’ on solid evidence, not on rumours and fairy tales. If there would be solid evidence of secret elite groups ruling our world, involved in satanic rituals, where is it? I think you just want to believe this for some reason, or you just like to troll the internet with such stories.

        1. it is more comforting to believe that one’s failures in life is due to some “grand conspiracy” rather than one’s own failings
          that’s why people lap this stuff up ” Robert Bernard” or whoever the actor is , knows his intended target market

      2. once in awhile the” mainstream” is right
        automatically, furiously rejecting everything “they” says is at least as stupid as automatically believing everything they say
        you figure that you “must” be right if you believe the opposite of everything “the mainstream” says

        yes..Alex Jones is a true Oracle..peddling his products to the people who believe him

        1. Any one in there right mind would not be paying any attention to Alex Jones.

  20. Zeer vreemd verhaal van deze authentiek verteller, een bekend bankier, blijkt bij nader onderzoek inderdaad geloofwaardig. Prof. Tom Philpott onderzocht het fenomeen al in 1981 (https://youtu.be/XWY8T3ujxNw). Dat het gemoemde inktzwarte boek een duistere geschiedenis heeft (omdat het een ongeauthoriseerde copie is en ook door antisemiten is opgemerkt etc.) doet niets af aan de inhoud (19de eeuws) die 1:1 blijkt te kloppen met de werkelijkheid die zich in de 20ste eeuw heeft ontvouwd. Het is dus geen fantasie. Zo’n uitzonderlijke kwaliteit kan niet onopgemerkt blijven. Het lijkt een relefex te worden om iedereen maar te veroordelen die de waarheid meer eeer aandoet dan de politiek correctheid.

      1. Huh? “Conspiracy theories on bankers, or the elite in general, involved in child abuse on a grand scale, are not new. However, every time when these rumours are investigated, the accusations turn out to be unfounded or deliberate hoaxes. “…..? And what about this one?:
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KkNvQ66GE-0 – “60 minutes Australia Westminster UK high level child abuse exposé.”

        1. Of course, there have been cases of abuse which have been covered up for a long time, just think about the abuse scandal in the Roman Catholic Church or the Jimmy Saville case. But all these cases have nothing to do with satanic rituals or the child abuse playing a part in the machinations of an illuster elite. It’s awful enough, but here we talking about men (mostly) behaving like sexual predators in a way that’s not tolerated by society in general, and in fact also not by the organisations they were part of, although those in too many cases decided to cover things up instead of taking the right measures.

      2. And what about this BBC report ?:
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zFWICRTcok4
        And you make a logical error. If there would be systematic child abuse in these high circles, then do you really think that there could ever be an unbiased investigation and that the “outcome” would be anything else than “unfounded accusations”, knowing the influence of these people can have on the course of justice? You use the intended outcome of your argumentation already as a proof for what your argumentation is trying to disproof. You claim: ‘Child abuse accusations vs. high level people are proven unfounded because justice is unbiased because high level people are righteous and they don’t abuse children and they don’t influence the course of justice.

        1. I’m not claiming that child abuse does not occur in higher circles. But as far as I know there has never been convincing evidence that there are elite groups engaging in satanistic rituals including child abuse and murder. De Dutroux case in Belgium can’t be seriously seen as an example for the existence of such elite groups. There are several police investigations in Belgium which have turned in a complete mess, because of the complicated political and lingual situation there, but those cases are too far off of what Bernard means to be interesting for discussion under this post.

        2. so to you because investigations discounted some allegations, that “proves” that allegations “must be” true? no possibility at all they are just unfounded allegations?
          rich/powerful people do tend to attract such
          conversely if they are so evil, conspiratorial & powerful why haven’ they made this so-called “whistle-blower” or any others,. disappear?/
          oh the fact they haven’t, PROVES they could..OMFG..go in circles

  21. It’s funny in the west Palm Beach news paper l believe reported his death with the name you mentioned.
    I like the conspiracy theory comments that you point out and the the obvious fact that the protocols of zion are truly being follow like a road map, is that the big question for you to answer

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked * Your comment might stay in the moderation queue for some time, especially if it is your first comment on this site. Usually all comments will be published, even if they express extreme disagreement with my writing, but I suggest that you find another place to leave rude and offensive comments. Also completely anonymous and non-English comments are not likely to pass moderation. Also read the Privacy Policy.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.