The Death of Royce J Robertson [P2]

"We all loved him because he didn’t do anything but love others," said Jennifer Goodson, a friend of Robertson's. Later on, people walked across the street where a podium and chairs were set up. Several people shared some of their fondest memories of Robertson, while others simply talked about the person he was. Many spoke on the love Robertson had for the community. "Royce was pure love," said Goodson. -https://kesq.com/

Why did

Royce Robertson

"pillar of the Joshua Tree Community," prolific entrepreneur, tireless contributor to local culture, and overall beloved/respected human being - decide to throw it all away in a moment of suicidal insanity?

NOTE: The person Royce Robertson allegedly interacted with/threatened before fleeing to the Country Club where he was shot by officers, may be referred to as "the 911 caller" or "the victim" or "the other driver" at various points in this blog. I just wanted to make this clear in order to head off any confusion where these terms are used interchangeably. The same person is being referenced when these terms are used.

RIVERSIDE COUNTY VIDEO PRESENTATION RELEASED 4.1.21

My first blog on this topic drew upon publicly available information from various localized media sources, including a detailed video statement from Sheriff Bianco. Riverside County Sheriff's department has since released a video presentation, also narrated by Sheriff Bianco. It includes exerpts from a 911 caller as well as police body cam footage. We will now compare this newer information with the material covered in my first blog on this topic, which I obviously encourage everyone to read.

[To view images at proper resolution, you must click/tap on them first. Enlarging the screen without doing this first will produce a blurry image. You may have to click "back" in order to return to the blog]

"...she received a text message that morning from her brother advising he was heading to her home in Rancho Mirage after running an errand at a bank." - Palm Springs Desert Sun

The above quote is all we know regarding where Mr Robertson was going at 7AM in the morning about 50 miles from home, driving what appeared to be a recently purchased high end Mercedes with Arizona dealer plates [which we were last told could not be traced to a specific dealer]. We don't know what errand he needed to run at the bank [which would not have been open yet], we don't know why he was going to his sister's house, and we don't know where he was coming from. According to the Sheriff's department, he did end up at a bank - but the only errand he seemed to be running was threatening a random stranger in the parking lot!

I attempted to obtain official documents directly from the Riverside County Sheriff records department in order to get clarification on some of these details, but apparently this is all still under investigation as I type. So it seems they will not be releasing any additional information until this process is concluded. Still, I think it is useful to take a "snap shot" of where things are in real time, as this approach can reveal changes in narratives [or solidify them] as more details are slowly rolled out. I was however given names of 2 officers allegedly involved in the shooting, and they are Deputy Michael Doyle and Deputy Garret Judge.

[Image taken from the video, depicting how Mr Robertson's car allegedly blocked the "victim's" car, just before threatening him with a gun - which we now know was an "air pistol" or "BB Gun."]

The police body-cam footage seems to have been released to the public on April 1st, 2021 [interesting date] via this link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PkU1WOze6fs. It was edited and included in a 5+ minute feature produced by the Riverside County Sheriff's department. If you watch the video, keep in mind that the narrator did not personally witness any of this [outside the body cam footage] as far as we know. Also keep in mind - everything that happened before police responded to the 911 call is entirely based upon the account of 1 unknown person we know absolutely nothing about. If there were any witnesses to the alleged threats Mr Robertson made to the unknown 911 caller, they have not been revealed.

“On Monday February 15th, 2021 at 7:25 am, the Riverside County Sheriff’s dept received a call regarding an assault with a deadly weapon in the area of Simon drive and hwy 111 in the City of La Quinta. Dispatch received information that an adult male driving a black Mercedes had pointed a handgun and made threatening statements toward the driver of another vehicle,…Investigators later learned that the suspect identified as Royce Javan Robertson stopped his car on the roadway in front of the victim’s car. Robertson exited his car while holding a gun and walked over to the victim who was still seated in his car. Robertson pointed his gun at the victim and yelled “do you want to die today?” After a short confrontation, Robertson got back into his car and drove away." - from the Riverside County Sheriff's Dept video presentation

In the first blog, we noted that Sheriff Bianco provided 2 slightly different versions of this story to the public. The above narrative corresponds more or less with his "version #1." But let's review a direct quote from "version #2" [my remarks in brackets]:

"the ORIGINAL [first] encounter was near the intersection of Simon and 111 [edit] in La Quinta. [edit]The victim of that exchange ended up pulling into a parking lot to get away from that other driver, but he [Robertson] FOLLOWED HIM INTO A PARKING LOT and then that was where the [2nd] exchange happened…[edit] I don’t wanna call it a road rage but there was something, there were words exchanged between the 2 drivers, yes. [edit] The first exchange [outside the parking lot] he went back to the victim’s vehicle, had the handgun in his hand, beat on the window with the handgun, yelled at him, asked him if he wanted to die"

Now notice that the newly released video presentation does not acknowledge the initial encounter between the 2 men which caused the "victim" to flee into a parking lot. If there was already a "victim" at that point, it means Mr Robertson already threatened or harmed the other driver in some way. If the victim had to flee into a parking lot to get away from him, it means the incident in the parking lot was the 2nd of 2 exchanges between the 2 men. Version #2 also says that "there were words exchanged between the 2 drivers." If that is true, why don't we know what the "victim" said to Mr Robertson during their 2 encounters? This information could give more insight into the circumstances surrounding the initial incident between the 2 drivers - which has not been clearly explained yet.

I think it is important to note that all of the details the public are getting from the media and the Sheriff's department with regard to this incident seem to be primarily concerned with demonstrating that officers were justified in shooting Mr Robertson. While it's understandable that the Sheriff department's primary concern would be demonstrating to the public that the use of deadly force was justified, it's the media's job to probe further, and help the public understand and process the circumstances leading up to the event. But it seems there are no journalists of integrity interested in doing this. I find that sad.

If we aren't going to put any effort into trying to understand what DROVE Mr Robertson to this absurdly out of character action, we can't begin to know where to start in preventing this type of thing from happening again. By all accounts, he was not just "normal," he was full of love for other people. So what this incident has taught us so far is that it is perfectly normal for ANY person to just blow up at any time and start pointing their gun at random people for no reason! Do we WANT to understand why people do these things? Or do we just want to throw our hands up and accept this as "the new normal?"

DO YOU WANNA DIE TODAY?

This is what Mr Robertson allegedly said to the unknown 911 caller, who Sheriff Bianco quotes repeatedly - as if he witnessed it. And yet according to all accounts, NOBODY heard Mr Robertson say this except the unknown 911 caller. So when you see this quote in the news headlines, just remember that as far as we know, only 1 person heard Mr Robertson say this. A person we know nothing about and who's identity has not been revealed to the public. That's called "an anonymous source" with absolutely no credentials. Doesn't mean the person is lying, but how many other stories have we shrugged off because they came from an anonymous source with no known credentials? The fact that police investigators believed and repeated what the 911 caller claimed, does not constitute proof of any kind. If we are going to claim we are "fact based" and "evidence based" in our assumptions, we must apply it in all circumstances, not just where we "feel like" applying it! It is often the smaller details such as this that we take for granted and that today's "journalists" rarely seem at all concerned with, unless it occassionally supports their specific political agenda.

Gentleman - 1. a chivalrous, courteous, or honorable man. "he behaved like a perfect gentleman"

2. a polite or formal way of referring to a man.

-Oxford Dictionary

"Gentleman just stuck a gun in my face" - unidentified 911 caller

If you watch and listen to the video presentation, you might notice some strange things about the alleged 911 call. The caller sounds oddly calm and unshaken. A man just shoved what he believed to be a deadly handgun in his face [which we now know was a BB gun]. He calls Mr Robertson a "gentleman" in his decidely calm 911 conversation with the operator. Does this person understand the meaning of the word?

"it’s a black Mercedes SL-60…there’s a dealer purchase plate on the back. It’s an AMG racing model." - 911 caller

I'm no expert on cars, but apparently this is a pretty expensive, rare vehicle. But the 911 caller seemed pretty familiar with it, almost as if he was some kind of Mercedes buff. For a guy who would understandably be in a state of trauma, he seemed particularly lucid. It sure would be nice to have an in depth interview with this individual. This was one of the the last people to interact with Mr Robertson before his deadly encounter, I'd say an in depth testimony is warranted. He can give an interview without his identity being revealed, if that is the issue. Who is being protected by not having him interviewed? Without pressure from the media and the public for answers, we may never get one.

"After a short confrontation, Robertson got back into his car and drove away. While deputies were responding to the location, dispatch relayed information that Robertson was traveling westbound on hwy 111. Responding deputies located Robertson’s vehicle near the intersection of Desert Horizons and hwy 111. A deputy attempted a traffic stop but Robertson would not pull over. Robertson drove past the entrance of the Desert Horizons Country Club and stopped his car just inside the gate." - from the Riverside County Sheriff Dept video presentation

The Sheriff has left out some very important details in this updated version. Compare with version #1 he gave:

"the suspect then got back in his vehicle and drove away…the victim of that call - uh called 911 and followed the driver of a black Mercedes. He called 911, deputies responded, they intercepted the driver of that vehicle just behind me here as they were pulling into …right here at the intersection and he pulled into the country club. He approached the gate, the gate was locked. He told the attendant that he needed to get through because the cops were chasing him, they opened the gate. He drove in, made an immediate U-turn, the deputies were behind him, stopped..."

According to version #1, the 911 caller FOLLOWED Mr Robertson as he fled the scene towards the Country Club. This detail is now left out in the video presentation. In version #1 Mr Robertson came to a locked gate when trying to enter the Country Club, and was let in after telling the attendent that the cops were chasing him. That entire exchange is now left out in the video presentation, where he basically just blows right past the gate without incident.

[Yellow text is mine]

The police pulled up behind Mr Robertson and attempted a "traffic stop." I think we all know what that means, and looking at the image above taken from the video presentation, it is safe to say the police were tailing closely behind the suspect - probably by mere SECONDS. Given that, Mr Robertson would not have had time to stop at the gate and convince the attendent to let him in because cops are following him. The attendent would probably have had to just INSTANTLY let him in while the cops were probably already within eye-shot. Try and picture how that all went down.

In the first blog we noted the confusing/contradictory details contained within Sheriff Bianco's initial statements regarding this incident, where he provides a blurry double vision picture of what happened and where. He also refers to Mr Robertson in PLURAL form when explaining how he entered the Country Club lot. By omitting the initial interaction outside the Chase Bank parking lot, ommitting the fact that the 911 caller FOLLOWED Mr Robertson to the Country Club, and ommitting the interaction with the parking attendant [who would know if Mr Robertson arrived alone or not, among other things] - omitting these facts just makes the story flow much smoother and cleaner. The downside is that we may not be getting the whole truth here, but rather a version favoring the preferred narrative of the Riverside County Sheriff's Department.

In the first blog, I noted that the Country Club's hours are listed as opening at 8AM, but I called them and discovered that golfers can show up as early as 7AM if they like. Mr Robertson and the cops showed up at almost exactly 7:30. So it is conceavable that he could have driven right in as stated in the video presentation. But questions remain regarding why Sheriff Bianco was initially so detailed in recounting Mr Robertson's interaction with the parking attendant, only to completely omit this interaction from the updated narrative.

As you can see above, there is one side of the street leading in and one leading out of the country club. They are seperated by a barrier which extends 20 or so feet beyond the entrance gate as one enters. Although the lanes leading in/out of the club look very narrow in this overhead view, they are actually very wide pathways, allowing 2 cars at a time to enter through 2 seperate toll booth style lanes. This is clearer to see in the street view image.

The above screenshot is the very first frame in the body cam footage section, showing a time stamp of 07:30:11. So Mr Robertson and the first cop arrive almost EXACTLY at 7:30.

[Click/tap on images to enlarge at the proper resolution. A new window may open. Click back to return to the blog.]

At 7:30:34 we get our first glimpse at the gate, through which both Mr Robertson and the cop likely drove through. The yellow arrow is pointing at the gate, which is in the UP position. This is where Sheriff Bianco stated in version #1 that Mr Robertson met a "locked" gate and a parking attendant. Where is this parking attendant and why is the gate still in the open position?

The green arrow is pointing at an area a car will soon appear. Keep this in mind for later.

The black arrow is pointing at Mr Robertson's Mercedes, which is facing the gates he just came through - as described in Sheriff Bianco's version #1, where he stated the suspect immediately made a U Turn after entering the parking lot. Why did he do this? And why isn't he trying to leave, since the gate is open? He was just fleeing the cops a moment ago, he could have just stopped his car and had his "suicide by cop" moment right there on the street. What did it matter if he died on the street or in the parking lot?

Why isn't the cop shouting for the parking attendant to close the gate, so the suspect cannot easily flee? It is easy to overlook some of the basic oddities here when we are fixated on the inevitable shootout, but it is the job of a detective to pause and notice things like this, lest he overlooks what might prove to be vital details.

At 7:31:16 we can now see a car has pulled up and is parked just on the other side of the gate. This is probably not a police officer. It does not appear to be a police car and Sheriff Bianco has stated that there were only 2 officers involved in the shooting. One is already inside the lot and the other is about to show up. We can also hear the officer on the scene asking about back-up, which had not yet arrived. So who is this person? In version #1, the 911 caller follows Mr Robertson as he flees the scene. Is this the 911 caller in the car? I don't know about you, but if someone stuck a gun in my face and asked me if I wanted to die a few moments ago, I would not want to be anywhere near that person, much less within direct eyesite! Perhaps this was just some random individual who drove up to play some golf, but saw the cop and did not know what to do? Or was this person there to block anyone else from coming in?

Think about this: the cop believes a man who is ARMED AND DANGEROUS is sitting in the Mercedes. He's not going to yell at/warn the individual off in the distance to stay back from the active crime scene? What if Mr Robertson thought this was the 911 caller and just bolted at him shooting?

Nearly a minute has passed since the cop arrived, what is Mr Robertson waiting for? Is he sitting in there trying to work up the courage to pull his "suicide by cop" move?

At 7:31:30, almost exactly a minute and a half after the first officer arrived, a second officer appears at the gate, which is still OPEN as you can see [where the orange arrow points]. The parked car is also still sitting there, within the yellow circle, lights/motor still appear to be on. What is this person waiting for, a shootout?

Almost exactly at the moment the 2nd cop pulls into the gateway, we hear the first officer shout for Mr Robertson to stay in his vehicle. From this angle, you can't really see if Mr Robertson is actually exiting his vehicle, and you can't see him open the door. He just sort of appears a second or 2 after the cop starts shouting. From this angle, it almost looks like his door was already open the whole time, but difficult to tell for sure. Interesting timing though. Was Mr Robertson waiting for this 2nd cop to arrive before ending his life, or did the 2nd cop's appearance simply "trigger" him? Did the yelling by the first cop "trigger" him? What TRIGGERED Royce Robertson to do all of this?

Notice that IMMEDIATELY after the 2nd cop arrives, the gate closes! It sat there open from at least the time that the first cop arrived, all the way up to the moment the 2nd cop drove in. Who is controlling that gate? The gate did not magically know that it needed to open for Mr Robertson, then a cop car, then a second cop car, before closing! It would certainly be helpful to ask this attendant why he closed that gate at that particular moment. This person is also about to witness the shooting, along with the individual [or individuals] sitting in the car just outside the gate, as if anticipating something. Is it just me, or does this all have a "planned" feeling to it?

Also notice the subtitles, quoting Mr Robertson as shouting "end my existence." That is NOT what he says, if you listen closely. He says "END EXISTENCE" multiple times. No matter how many times I listen back, I do not hear him say "end MY existence." Why is this significant? Because "end MY existence" means "I want to die." One reason that they may have intentionally added that word "my" in the subtitle is because it supports the "suicide by cop" theory. If push ever came to shove, they can always just say "oh, oops!." But no, he said "END EXISTENCE," which is much more disturbing in a way, because it suggests that Mr Robertson is in a state of dissassociation. End existence as a whole? Where is this man's mind at?

Dissociation is a break in how your mind handles information. You may feel disconnected from your thoughts, feelings, memories, and surroundings. It can affect your sense of identity and your perception of time. The symptoms often go away on their own. It may take hours, days, or weeks. - Webmd.com

"He is not this person with a gun that was trying to shoot a cop." - Demetria Robertson, Desert Sun

I am not suggesting that Royce Robertson is not the man in the video, I am suggesting that he appears to be in an extreme altered state of mind. A state of mind that is not consistent with the pillar of the Joshua Tree community so many knew and loved. What caused this?

While investigators are focused upon ensuring that the Riverside County Sheriff's Department is found to be justified in shooting to death a man who pulled a BB Gun on them - OUR focus should be on what caused Mr Robertson to enter into this altered state of mind. Did he have some sort of latent mental illness? Did something catastrophic happen in his life that caused him to snap? Did he have enemies?

What is causing many people to snap in our Country? Why have mass shootings and violence been on the rise for years now? [and often carried out by individuals with questionable motives or none at all!] Typically, the news media and politicians will turn this into a political opportunity to promote the idea that guns are the problem. Even in this case, I read some comments under this video where people were suggesting that BB Guns should be banned! This may seem like a "small town" issue, but it's part of a larger MENTAL epidemic in America that we need to address and get to the bottom of.

ClickHEREto read Part 3.

Click HERE to read Part 1.

Here are some other popular blogs I have done, click to read.

The Darrell "Dimebag" Abbott Murder
The Chris Cornell Death
Star Wars and the Occult
America: Land of the Plumed Serpent
THE WATCHMEN SERIES
Mass shooting at an Eagles of Death Metal concert

This blog was researched, written, and continues to be maintained by 1 person. If you enjoyed it and would like to encourage more of them, donations can be made by clicking the button below.

The Death of Royce J Robertson [PT I]

[last update 3.09.21]

The sudden, tragic death of

Royce J Robertson

pillar of the

Joshua Tree

community...

Most people (myself included) first heard the name "Joshua Tree" when Irish pop band U2 released their 5th album in 1987. Apparently the original working title of the album was "The Two Americas." I'm not going to dig up quotes here, but the apparent observation Bono and friends made upon exploring the deserts of California and beyond is that their idea of what America was supposed to be did not always match the reality they experienced. How that morphed into "Joshua Tree" is a story anyone can probably dig up easy enough, but the 3 hour drive from downtown Los Angeles to Joshua Tree National park will probably give a hint where their heads were at with this concept.

The main route running through Joshua Tree is highway 62, aka Twentynine Palms Highway. Right on the 62 in the center of town is the Joshua Tree Coffee Company. The owner of this company was a charismatic 33 year old man by the name of Royce Robertson. I say "was" because according to the Hi-Desert Star, he "was shot and killed by deputies outside a country club" in Indian Wells on Monday February 15th, 2021.

The circumstances surrounding this incident seem to revolve around a dispute he got into with someone, who he allegedly then threatened as he pulled out a gun. But according to his sister, Demetria, Royce Robertson "didn't have a violent bone in his body."

From https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qQskHG7uGPY&feature=youtu.be [News channel 3]

“It doesn’t feel real…He was a good person. This isn’t…they should all feel bad about this. They didn’t - they didn’t kill a bad guy, they killed a good guy...not a violent person, my brother...he didn’t have a violent bone in his body. I absolutely 100% would never think that my brother would do anything like that…he helped people, he was all about helping people in need and making the world a better place. That was his motto…We want the body cam footage, we want proof of what happened and we want them to be honest with us…I just feel that that’s what they owe."

from desertsun.com:

“He was one of the most gentle people,” she said. “My brother, if I tried to kill a spider in my own house, he would chide me and he would take that spider out of my house and let it live...He is not this person with a gun that was trying to shoot a cop,” she added.

"A lot of people called about him. He was loved" - Julie Harrison, JT Coffee Company...

"Royce was about the most generous guy you'd ever meet...All of this is just so unlike him." - Joshua Tree Coffee Company Manager Eric Bartlett

"The town is in shock — Joshua Tree is in shock,” [Robertson was] “just a real pillar of the community, loved and looked up to.”...“Never in a million years...” [could we have expected this]

One of the burning questions here is, "what was Mr Robertson doing exactly, 50 miles from home at 7 on a Monday morning, driving a car that doesn't seem to be his regular vehicle?"

[You must tap or click on these images, in order to enlarge/save them at the correct resolution. Simply enlarging the screen without clicking on images first will produce blurry details.]

Most of what we know about this incident comes from Sheriff Chad Bianco, of Riverside County Sheriff's Department. I attempted to get some sort of Police/Investigative report, but so far have not been able to. What we do have is the above "press release." Here are some basic facts noted within it:

Around 7:25AM on Monday, February 15th 2021, Riverside Country Sheriff's Dept "received a call" from an unidentified individual. We are told this was regarding a "male suspect" who was "brandishing" a firearm and "displayed" this handgun at someone, while threatening to kill the person. The male suspect then fled the scene, but deputies caught up with him as he attempted to enter the Desert Horizon's Country Club. Male suspect then gets out of his car, and points his gun at the deputies, at which point they shoot and kill him.

This release claims there are "no outstanding suspects" and no witnesses are mentioned. None of the identities of those involved with the incident, including the "involved officers," are mentioned. This release was then shortly updated to include the identity of the deceased, as "Royce Robertson, 33 years old, resident of Joshua Tree."

The press release and video interview with Sheriff Bianco seem to have both been put out the day after the shooting, February the 16th. Sheriff Bianco gives the official story to the public:

"…approximately 10-15 minutes after 7 O’clock, a driver of - 2 drivers of vehicles engaged in some type of argument disagreement…the - one of the drivers exited his vehicle, approached the 2nd driver with a handgun, pointed it at the driver and asked him if he wanted to die...the brief exchange of words between the 2…the suspect then got back in his vehicle and drove away…"

The Sheriff starts to say "a driver of" but catches himself. Was he about to say there was only 1 driver? He does this again when he almost says "THE [singular] driver..." but quickly corrects himself to say "one of the drivers".

What was Mr Robertson doing 50 miles from home so early and why did he have a gun with him? Who was this individual that he allegedly threatened? A stranger, or perhaps someone he knew? An interview with this person would be helpful. Given Mr Robertson's decidedly non-violent reputation among those who knew him, what prompted such erratic behavior? We don't have much to go on at this point, but what we do have to go on raises more questions than answers.

"...the victim of that call - uh called 911 and followed the driver of a black Mercedes. He called 911, deputies responded, they intercepted the driver of that vehicle just behind me here as they were pulling into …right here at the intersection and he [singular] pulled into the country club. He approached the gate, the gate was locked. He told the attendant that he needed to get through because the cops were chasing him, they opened the gate. He drove in, made an immediate u-turn, the deputies were behind him, stopped, the driver of that black Mercedes exited his vehicle with a handgun, and a deputy involved shooting occurred. 2 of our deputies fired their handgun at the suspect, the suspect was struck multiple times, and he died at the scene."

If you are a parking lot attendant, isn't it your job to make sure CRIMINALS don't enter? If someone says, "the cops are following me" that sorta indicates the person is a criminal! If this person threatened you, you might let him in out of fear. If you knew the person, you might try to help them out. Sure would be nice to hear from this attendant, especially given the fact this person likely witnessed the shooting! But so far, this entire story is coming from 1 person - Sheriff Bianco. While I am sure he is reliable, he did not seem to witness any of this. He is giving us SECOND HAND information. Wouldn't it be good to hear from at least 1 of the people involved in the incident?

What result, other than death, did Mr Robertson expect when making the decision to pull his gun out on cops? It would be one thing if we knew nothing about Mr Robertson. We could simply assume his erratic, threatening behavior that morning was of a desperate criminal on the run, probably high on something. But again, he did not fit that profile at all, according to those who knew him well. The mental state of Royce Robertson, and what lead him there is crucial to understanding what occured here.

"Two of our deputies fired their handgun at the suspect, the suspect was struck multiple times, and he died at the scene. At this time we don’t know the identification of the suspect, that will be pending, and...FOR NOW we have 2 deputies that were involved in the shooting, obviously this is early the investigation is still ongoing..."

2 deputies were involved, "FOR NOW." The Sheriff pauses and then puts emphesis upon these words "for now." He just said "Two of our deputies fired their handgun at the suspect" before that, and now he is saying "for now" two were involved. They already had the 911 call records, has Sheriff Bianco not looked at the dispatch records before addressing the public on this very sensitive topic? Does he know how many cops were at the scene of the crime or doesn't he? Does he know how many cops pulled out guns and shot at Mr Robertson or doesn't he?

Note that Sheriff Bianco is using the phrase "handgun" above, in reference to the deputy's weapons. This will be important to remember later in the blog.

At this point, Sheriff Bianco says they don't yet know the name of "the suspect." Did Mr Robertson NOT have his wallet/license on him? What sensible person goes on a 50 mile drive without their wallet/I.D. while packing a gun? If the Sheriff simply didn't want to reveal the deceased's name so early in the investigation, why not just say so? But no, the Sheriff said "we don’t know the identification of the suspect." That's pretty specific. We don't know = we found no ID/Driver's Licence on him.

Sheriff Bianco then re-tells the story, this time with quite a few video edits [edit marks notated for reference]:

[edit]"...the original encounter was near the intersection of Simon and 111 [edit] in La Quinta. [edit] The victim of that exchange ended up pulling into a parking lot to get away from that other driver, but he followed him into the parking lot and then that's where the exchange happened…"

Earlier, the Sheriff mentioned ONE encounter between the 2 individuals. Now he is saying there were two encounters. One at the intersection and one in a parking lot. Parking lot? Didn't the Sheriff already tell us that Mr Robertson was shot and killed in the parking lot after fleeing the scene? How many parking lots are we talking about here Sheriff?

In the Sheriff's original version, Mr Robertson pulls into a parking lot AFTER threatening an individual and leaving the scene. The "victim" of that encounter then FOLLOWS MR Robertson, as he drove to a parking lot where he was shot and killed by cops. But in this alternate version, Mr Robertson FOLLOWS "the victim," who is trying to get away from him, into a parking lot where "the exchange happened." What is the definition of "exchange" exactly in this context? It's getting confusing here because the Sheriff now seems to have 2 versions of the story going, which are slightly different!

[edit]I don’t wanna call it a road rage but there was something, there were words exchanged between the 2 drivers, yes. [edit] The first exchange he went back to the victim’s vehicle, had the handgun in his hand, beat on the window with the handgun, yelled at him, asked him if he wanted to die,.."

Sheriff Bianco now confirms that the "handgun" came out and Mr Robertson threatened the other individual during their "first exchange." So that'd be before ANYONE took off to whatever parking lot they went to.

"...there were some more words exchanged, he [Robertson] got in the car and left, and then when THEY pulled in here with the deputies..."

"They?" How many people were with Mr Robertson when he pulled into the Country Club parking lot as he was followed by deputies? Go back and read the earlier quote from Sheriff Bianco, where he clearly says "HE [singular] pulled into the Country Club...HE [singular] told the attendant that HE [singular] needed to get through because the cops were chasing HIM [singular]." As we noted earlier from the Sheriff's direct quote, one version had "the victim" fleeing the scene and into a parking lot after "exchange #1", while Mr Robertson followed. So according to THAT version, "THEY" [plural] did go into a parking lot. But this is not the version news articles are pushing. The news media's version has Mr Robertson fleeing the scene, unnamed individual followed him, and Robertson is alone by the time he drives into the Country Club parking lot, with cops tailing him. So when the Sheriff says "...THEY pulled in here with the deputies," well, the only "they" other than the deputies must be Mr Robertson and whoever he was with. Who was he with?

Maybe the Sheriff just doesn't have the story straight in his head, as he does fumble his words more than once:

"...he got out with the vehicle in it - I take that back he exited the vehicle, the gun was hidden, he retreaved the vehicle from under his arm [that is a direct quote, he called the gun a "vehicle"] or in a jacket or shirt or something, and then when he produced that handgun that’s when the deputies fired. [edit] We have no idea who the suspect is, where the vehicle’s from. It has Arizona paper plates but we have not been able to verify that with Arizona. They have no record of it."

They had "no idea" who the suspect was, so the suspect had no driver's license identification on him? Why would Mr Robertson be driving a black Mercedes with unverified paper plates from out of state [which cops could not, with all of their fancy technology, verify in their database], 50 miles from home at 7AM on a Monday Morning, no license on him, packing a gun and waving it around at some random guy who ticked him off? And who in their right mind would EVER point a gun at some cops for such petty reasons? That's a suicide move! Are there any pictures of this vehicle? What was the VIN number? I assume there must be a whole lot of information we don't have which fills the gaps here.

There was a follow up story by desertsun.com on 2.18.21 with Mr Robertson's sister, which has no video that I saw, but she is quoted as saying:

“My brother didn’t have any guns,” Demetria Robertson told The Desert Sun on Thursday. “He had two BB guns and two antique rifles,” she said, referring to two family heirlooms that he kept at home....She said her brother had been known to keep at least one of the BB guns — a type of air gun that shoots metallic ball projectiles — in his car.  She said he would use them to shoot objects like beer cans or logs in the desert..."

Demetria first says her brother didn't have any guns, then goes on to say he had 4! Are "antique rifles" not types of guns? Is a BB gun not a gun? I'm not saying she is a liar, but that is how it reads above. I assume these are heavily edited statements that make more sense when heard in their proper context. But as it reads here, I'm seeing journalists moving quotations around in order to fit a narrative. I guess they figure nobody is gonna look that closely, becuase it's pretty sloppy as you can see...

The lethal weapons Mr Robertson owned were not handguns, so they could not have been what the Sheriff says he had at the crime scene. There is also no mention of rifles or any other weapons at the scene, other than a single handgun. Recall that the Sheriff used the word "handgun" when describing officers shooting Mr Robertson. So when the Sheriff says "handgun," we can assume he means one with deadly lead bullets, NOT a BB Gun.

Now it may be true that Mr Robertson kept a BB gun in his car, and yes, shooting stuff out in the desert, even with LETHAL weapons, is not so out of the ordinary. But we didn't get a direct quote from his sister on this, the article is PARAPHRASING her. There is also the possibility that Mr Robertson did not keep a gun of any kind in his car, even if his sister thought he MAY have - which, again, the artcle has only paraphrased her as saying. There is also the question of the vehicle. Did he always drive a Mercedes with out-of-state paper license plates that cannot be verified? Sounds like a temporary or recently acquired vehicle to me. If this was not his regular vehicle, would he have had his BB Gun sitting in it by default?

"When The Desert Sun asked the sheriff's department about the type of gun recovered at the scene, Sgt. Albert Martinez responded: "As soon as the investigation allows we will release more details."...Demetria Robertson believes her brother had a BB gun during the confrontation with the motorist. She said such “stupid” behavior could warrant a night in jail or mental health assistance, “but not being mowed down.”..

Now they are saying Mr Robertson's sister "believes" her brother had a BB gun during the confrontation with the motorist. I couldn't find a quote or a video of her saying these words, so again, her statements are being paraphrased by the author of the article. Sheriff Bianco already referred to Mr Robertson's weapon as a "handgun" as he did the officer's weapons at the scene of the crime. So why would we assume officers recovered anything but a DEADLY handgun? Sgt Martinez does not clarify according to the article. If Sgt Martinez had verified that Mr Robertson was in possession of a deadly handgun, this would only re-enforce what the public probably assumed already. But by refusing to confirm whether it was a BB gun or not when questioned - this really just creates more suspicion regarding the detail.

“He was one of the most gentle people,” she said. “My brother, if I tried to kill a spider in my own house, he would chide me and he would take that spider out of my house and let it live. “He is not this person with a gun that was trying to shoot a cop,” she added...The sheriff added, "when [the suspect] exited the vehicle, the gun was hidden — he retrieved the [gun] from under his arm or in a jacket or under his shirt or something and then when he produced that handgun that's when the deputies fired."...A sheriff's department news release later added: "The suspect was in possession of a handgun and pointed it at the deputies.... A handgun was located at the scene."

If you recall earlier, Officer Bianco said "he retrieved the VEHICLE from under his arm..." The above quoted article has taken that word out and paraphrased the word "GUN" in its place. Sure, that's obviously what he meant, but the fact he was stumbling his words is conspicuously left out now.

Lots of talk about a "handgun," nothing about it being a BB, which would be a pretty blatant detail to leave out if true, as this would greatly alter public perception of the event. In a time like now where police brutality is particularly of interest to the mainstream media, this story is getting decidedly little attention. Where is the demand for transparency? This man was a "pillar of the community!"

"To me, he was murdered," [Demetria] Robertson said, adding she received a text message that morning from her brother advising he was heading to her home in Rancho Mirage after running an errand at a bank." - desertsun.com

Banks open at 7AM? The closest teller was 50 miles from home? The above is from a Desert Sun article released on March 7th, 2021 - about 3 weeks after the death of Royce Robertson. Earlier we noted the burning question," what was Mr Robertson doing 50 miles from home so early in the morning?" The answer, in partial form, has been released here - but besides the fact that it is vague, it is also not a direct quote! Observe that the part where Demetria Robertson states she thinks her brother "was murdered," is quoted - and this was also captured on video. But the part about Royce supposedly texting her that morning is PARAPHRASED. The author of the article stated Ms Robertson said this, but how do we know she really did? Is the Desert Sun adding details and taking quotes out of context in order to fill holes in this story?

The Desert Sun also re-iterates in this more recent article, that Demetria claimed Royce "had a BB gun," insinuating that this is what Mr Robertson pointed at the cops, without actually stating it. But again, this is a paraphrased quote that could easily have been taken out of context or not stated at all! And as we have seen, the "handgun" referenced by Sheriff Bianco earlier, is clearly INTENDED to reference a lethal one, not a BB gun.

[A card was signed by people who knew Royce Robertson, at a private gathering held on Sunday, March 7th 2021.]

Most of the entries on the above pictured card are expressions of love from those who knew Royce Robertson, but there is an entry on the lower left which expresses the anger and confusion some are obviously feeling regarding all of this:

"We are seeking the truth of what happened to you, Royce, and following this case. Riverside County Sheriff dept will be held to account for using lethal force. You will not be forgotten, nor the traumatic circumstances of your demise. Justice will prevail!"

From https://kesq.com:

"The DA doesn’t return my text messages, I’ve texted him multiple times..." "To me he was murdered and not only was he murdered but they’ve treated my family very badly, law enforcement has. From making fun of his jewelry when I picked up the things that were on his body when he died..." - Demetria Robertson

Given the questionable story as relayed to the public by Sheriff Bianco, and given we have no first hand account of what actually happened here - I think the feelings of distrust expessed by those who were close to the deceased towards police investigators is justified.

In addition to opening the Joshua Tree Coffee Company, Royce Robertson was personally interested in natural forms of healing. He recently started joshuatreesilver.com. I checked his website within 48 hours of hearing about his death, and it was already down. According to him, he had found a reliable high end facility that uses lazers to achieve TRUE colloidal silver - as opposed to the typical "Ionic Silver" which often falsely sells itself as "Colloidal." These high end lazers are very sophisticated and expensive, so this was not just some casual hobby of his. He was very passionate about it. A worker at the local health food store who sells Mr Robertson's colloidal silver products did not have any information on what will happen to the company, but Joshua Tree Coffee, just across the street, seems to be going strong.

To read part 2, CLICK HERE.

For part 3,CLICK HERE

You might also be interested in the blog I did regarding THE DIMEBAG DARRELL MURDER

This blog was researched, written, and continues to be maintained by 1 person. If you enjoyed it and would like to encourage more of them, donations can be made by clicking the button below.

The Rise of Skywalker PT II: What's the Point?

BLOG TITLE: WHAT'S THE POINT?

Mel Brook's "Space Balls" was a comedy spoof that came out in 1987, which mainly makes fun of the Star Wars films. One of the funnier scenes has "Dark Helmet" dueling with "Lone Star," playing off of the phallic/masculine themes/symbolism lurking behind The Force and Jedi lightsaber duels. All the "mystical/spiritual" talk in the Star Wars films often do sound like coded sexual references ["Ah yes, I can FEEL your anger!...they are near, I have FELT them!"] When they aren't, a cheap suggestive joke is waiting to turn it into one - and cheap jokes in bad taste are Mel Brook's signature. The film was panned by critics, but gets called a "cult classic" now.

[No, that's not another shot from Spaceballs, this one's from "The Last Jedi." What's Luke doing with his "Schwartz" here?]

Djedi (also Dedi or Djedi of Djed-Sneferu) is the name of a fictional ancient Egyptian magician appearing in the fourth chapter of a story told in the legendary Westcar Papyrus. He is said to have worked wonders during the reign of king (pharaoh) Khufu (4th Dynasty). - wiki

THE DARK HELMET

The word "Jedi" seems to have been derived from the Egyptian "Djedi" concept. The goal of the Djedi is to metaphorically "RAISE the Djed pillar" within him/herself to attain enlightenment [representative of the rising sun within]. The Djed pillar is a phallic symbol, and is probably related to the "May Pole" ritual celebrated by ancient pagans.

With this in mind, it is interesting to note that Darth Vader's helmet resembles a dark, glistening penis, effectively symbolizing the "generative force" of the dark side. His heavy, rhythmic breathing contributes to this interpretation, not to mention parallels to the Egyptian myths surrounding Osiris/Horus/Set. Many of the light sabers used by "wielders of the force" also resemble small Djed pillars, the laser itself representative of the semen shooting from the phallus, or the serpent path of inner enlightenment.

In fact, it used to be traditional to keep a human skull in one's study as a paperweight and momento mori (a "reminder of death"). In the time of Jesus and John, it was a common belief that the mummified heads or skulls of prophets, magicians, and wonder-workers held a particular power...The Knights Templar, in their confessions, also claimed that their Baphomet head could "prophesy" to them... - Baphomet: The Temple Mystery Unveiled

Kylo Ren is obsessed with Darth Vader's helmet/head, and uses it as a sort of divination tool - echoing the Baphomet rituals of the Templars. He then re-assembles his own destroyed helmet, reflecting a "cracked" mental state and his tendency to be a "loose cannon." [the phallic innuendo is seemingly endless here]

DON'T ASK, DON'T TELL

The above screenshot is taken from a scene where Kylo Ren first walks in to address his henchmen wearing his reconstituted helmet. Just after mentioning that there is a spy within the ranks of the First Order, General Pryde stares accusingly at General Hux, who then stares back with a revealing smirk. At that moment Kylo Ren detects "unease" with his appearance from Hux. Now think about this for a moment...Pryde already seems to know Hux is the spy, yet Kylo Ren - with all of his powerful mind reading abilities to have conversations with people from across the universe, does not? Adding to the absurdity, he even "detects" feelings of unease from Hux at this very moment. Rather than translate these feelings of "unease" as an indication of his betrayal - Kylo seems more concerned about what Hux thinks of his new helmet!

During this same scene, the man sitting next to General Pryde questions the motives of Palpatine's offer to loan his army to the First Order. Kylo Ren then uses the force to thrust him into the air and shut him up. Kylo is quick to punish when he detects a challenge to his authority, but again, he couldn't detect Hux's betrayal in that same scene?

Later, Hux begins to make a suggestion when Kylo Ren cuts him off silently with an authoritative raising of his finger, as-if to say "I am the master, know your place beneath me or else!" Yet he does nothing else, just after having thrust someone in the air for questioning Palpatine's motives in their collaboration. Hux then gives him a shit eating smirk, hinting at the palpable "tongue in cheek" comedy of the scene. What Hux is saying here silently is, "you know this is a game of "Slave and Master" and you love it as much as I do!"

In my blog on "The Last Jedi," we noted the covert homosexual references in the beginning of that film, culminating with Hux's Mel Brooks worthy quote, "I'll take it in my chambers," just after losing a Dreadnaut ship to the resistance. Snoke then disciplines Hux by FORCING him into a position on the floor exactly matching one who is being raped from behind. Snoke then says "my disappointment with your performance cannot be overstated..." For all the supposed "continuity flaws" within "The Rise of Skywalker," they started right where the previous film left off with regard to these not so subtle hints of homosexuality. It's not a question of whether "homosexuality in Star Wars is ok or not." It's a question of, "why are these themes being placed here covertly, rather than openly?"

The first scene with Poe, Finn, and Chewbakka has them playing a game of Holochess. Chewbakka is beating them over and over, and they jokingly accuse him of cheating because he is taking a VERY long time to choose his moves. Chewbakka gets upset at this accusation, then Poe smiles and admits he was joking. This isn't a very funny scene, what is the point of it? The point here is to place emphasis on the amount of TIME passing, for reasons which will be explained shortly.

Dejarik, also known as holochess, was a popular two-player game in which teams of holographic creatures battled each other on a circular board. - Wookieepedia

If Holochess is a 2 player game, why are Finn and Poe sitting so close together, as if they are both playing against Chewbakka? There is plenty of room in this sitting area for them to stretch out, they do not need to sit this close. They are leaning into each other, shoulders are touching, and probably knees. A lot of TIME is passing as well! Look at Finn's expression. He's bored, he'd rather be doing something else. What could that be?

Most straight men would get uncomfortable sitting so close to their "buddy" in silence for so long, especially when there is really no reason to do so and there is plenty of room to move over and stretch out! Even if they were gay this would be somewhat odd. Do gay men just sit pressed together like this all the time in everyday situations? The purpose of this scene is to hint at an unspoken gay relationship between Poe and Finn, again using subtle comedy as a cloak. Why not just present them as gay characters, instead of all of this silly innuendo?

In "Return of the Jedi," Han Solo walks in just after Luke tells Leia that she is his sister. Leia is very emotional as Luke walks away, and Solo doesn't understand why, but assumes that she is having some sort of affair with Luke. This is because in the first two Star Wars films, we don't know that Luke and Leia are brother and sister, and there is a little bit of sexual tension built up between them. They even kiss! Solo is also attracted to Leia, so there was a bit of rivalry regarding who was gonna "get with" Leia first. This scene pictured above in "Rise of Skywalker" echoes that scene from "Return of the Jedi," but Poe is playing the jealous guy [Solo] who doesn't understand what's going on and Finn is playing the emotional one [Leia] holding out on the secret! Rey is just sorta there, as if she has left the room [like Luke does in the ROTJ scene]

Finn never actually reveals what this secret is that he needs to tell Rey - and many critics have pointed this out as one of the confusing flaws of the film. Well, maybe these critics haven't considered that it isn't the SECRET that matters, it's the jealousy it generates in Poe regarding the fact that Finn might be messing around with Rey! Or that they have some sort of secret bond, which makes Poe jealous. [I read an article which claimed that according to JJ Abrahms, the "secret" Finn was holding out on was that he felt "the Force" within him. Pretty lame, and further confirmation that the "secret" didn't matter as much as how it functioned in making Poe jealous]

To present major characters as gay could legitimately represent the franchise attempting to "break down social barriers" in mainstream film. But to hint at it subtly, while presenting them as "straight" indicates an "in the closet" approach to telling a story. Isn't that sending a more negative message than good? It basically says "keep it in the closet, but make comedic innuendos alluding towards it!"

On another level, the Poe/Finn relationship sends confusing messages to youth who might be forming their sexual identity still. It blurs the line between a heterosexual "buddy/buddy" relationship, and a homosexual one, and does so in an intentionally deceptive manner. What is Disney trying to accomplish by sending these confusing/mixed sexual messages to the youth that they know are watching?

The big "LGBT moment" in the film, according to mainstream media, was the kiss between D'arcy [Amanda Lawrence] and another female resistance fighter at the end of the film. Now, did they have to pick the most homely looking woman they could find to play the franchise's first "out" lesbian? If you watch for it, there are several moments in both "The Rise of Skywalker" and "The Last Jedi" focusing in very closely on D'Arcy's face. Why do you think they did that? They want us to dwell upon her looks. They want us thinking to ourselves, "wow, she is very unattractive! I wonder why they cast her? Does she even like men?" All due respect to Amanda Lawrence, her acting may be excellent, and I take nothing away from her performance - she does a perfectly good job in the films. It shouldn't be about "looks," it should be about whoever is the best actor for the job, and she seems well suited for it. But by taking a woman with VERY OBVIOUS below average looks, putting her on the big screen, zooming WAY in on her face at several key moments, then finally revealing her as the franchise's first lesbian? To me, this says "ok LGBT Star Wars fans, here's your lesbian! Is she ugly enough to qualify?" Now if I am cruel for pointing this out, what does that make the producers of this film for putting it in there?

In response to those who desired to boycott the film [the Force Awakens"] over their disagreements with the existence of a black stormtrooper, Boyega replied, "I'm proud of my heritage, and no man can take that away from me. I wasn't raised to fear people with a difference of opinion. They are merely victims of a disease in their mind." - Wiki

For most of us, our first introduction to the latest Star Wars trilogy was an image of John Boyega portraying Finn, wearing a Stormtrooper outfit. I brought up the racial connotations of a Black actor wearing an outfit named after 3rd reich soldiers in my blog on "The Force Awakens." Apparently, I wasn't the only one who noticed the irony, as quoted above. To further this largely overlooked controversy, take a look at what the name Finn means in Old Irish:

"In Old Irish, finn/find means "white, bright, lustrous; fair, light-hued (of complexion, hair, etc.); fair, handsome (often, but not necessarily, implying fairness of complexion); bright, blessed; in moral sense, fair, just, true" - Wiki

That's right, Finn translates to WHITE PERSON! And if you recall, Poe was the one who gave him this name! Is it a coincidence that this name happens to mean the OPPOSITE of his racial identification in Old Irish? I doubt it. So next time someone says, "hey I think it's great they are casting more ethnically diverse characters in Star Wars films!" Tell them to look up the meaning of the word Finn in old Irish.

After believing she blew up the ship Chewbakka was on, Rey reveals to Finn that she had a vision of the throne of the Sith. Finn then says, "with Ren on it?" Rey responds "...and me."

Although the Sith throne on Exegol is an impressive prop in the film, the actual seat itself appears to be designed for 1 person to sit comfortably. In one scene, Rey says to Finn she had a vision of Ren AND her on it. Now if that's true, someone was sitting completely or halfway on someone else's lap! I don't think this awkward dialogue is an accident, I think they are trying to emphasize [indirectly] the carnal, non emotional aspect of Ren and Rey's relationship, or rather a depraved sexual energy circulating between them. [referred to in the film by the decidedly sterile word, "dyad."] Let's also remember that this throne is within a citadel where cloning is occurring. That is: reproduction without physical sex or a personal relationship between 2 people. This compliments the A.I. theme running through the film.

How exactly are we supposed to interpret this "bond" they have, which culminates in one of the more awkward kisses in the Star Wars saga? [2nd only to the Rose/Finn kiss, which was just pointlessly repulsive!] There is no sexual chemistry between the 2, Ren is a decidedly ugly man [taking nothing away from Adam Driver's excellent performance as an actor] and their "friendship" never quite defines itself. Even when Ren speaks about offering his hand to Rey, and how she's going to "take it" when it's offered next time - even this somehow manages to ring devoid of romance, not to mention obvious hints of the Luke/Vader relationship. It's almost fascinating how well their bond avoids exact definition for the duration of the film, save a sense of mutual pity for the other at times. These films seem to have a thing about not having a single "normal" romantic relationship. This gets into the ambiguity theme which runs so ubiquitously through many of the scenes in these films. Is there an agenda here to ERODE the idea of a "standard, healthy romantic relationship?" I don't mean to sound like Mr Rogers, but just consider all of the covert twisted sexual concepts we've examined in these blogs, the demonic/sexual symbolism hidden within the promotional posters [see PTI] in comparison to the utter void of sexy/romantic character relationships that go anywhere. What exactly is going on in your head, Mr heir to the Walt Disney estate?

THE HEALING OF A SERPENT

"Serpent: [1] a snake. [2] a wily, treacherous, or malicious person. [3] the Devil; Satan. Gen. 3:1–5. [4] a firework that burns with serpentine motion or flame. [5] an obsolete wooden wind instrument with a serpentine shape and a deep, coarse tone. Compare ophicleide. [6] (initial capital letter) Astronomy. the constellation Serpens." - dictionary.com

When Rey and her companions travel to the desert planet Pasaana in search of Ochi's dagger, they find themselves swallowed up by a quicksand-like substance in the ground. This doesn't kill them of course, but spits them out underground into a tunnel system. Here, they encounter a vexis. A vexis is a large, snake/worm-like creature with many eyes. C3PO then announces loudly in a state of panic, "Serpent! Serpent! Serpent!" Notice he didn't say "Vexis! Vexis! Vexis!" [note the X in that word] Although the audience has never seen this creature, C3PO makes sure that we identify it specifically as a "serpent." Why?

Observe meaning #3 above, from dictionary.com - it is the devil from Genesis. The serpent/snake appears in many other places in the Old Testament, such as Numbers 21, which occurs in the DESERT! Also noteworthy, the word VEX appears quite a few times in the Old Testament [King James version]. So this biblical association with the serpent/vexis is being re-enforced from several angles here.

If we look at the other meanings, we get references to fire, movement, sound, shape, and even a constellation in outer space. This is a very loaded symbol in the film, especially when we recall the serpent embedded covertly within the main poster, as I showed in my last blog on this film. If you have not read it, here is the image I am referring to:

"Vex: make (someone) feel annoyed, frustrated, or worried, especially with trivial matters." - dictionary.com

In PT I we looked at how cropping and placing a duplicate of the main poster for the film next to it "mirror image" style, reveals certain details which cannot be there by accident. One of these is a large snake [to the left of #1], which Rey appears to be looking at, small Kylo Ren seems to be pointing at with the tip of his cross-saber, and Zorii Bliss is aiming two guns at.

Kylo's cross is an "X" shape, and this snake is called a VEXIS. We noted all of the X symbolism in the promotional posters, and it is continuing here in the film. We'll talk more about that, but for now let's get a little more into this serpent thing.

Rather than immediately killing the huge, threatening looking beast - Rey becomes captivated, and actually looks and acts turned on. Observe her facial expressions and breathing in this scene. This is not fear she is expressing, it is sexual EXCITEMENT. As she steps directly inside a circle formed by the serpent's body, we find that it is wounded.

There is something deceptively psychological about this scene. We are at first supposed to be terrified of the serpent, but Daisy Ridley's performance sort of guides us through a mental process of re-evaluating what we consider "scary" or "threatening" and immediately switches these feelings over to sympathy, sexual excitement, and healing! We are supposed to view this as a sort of "wounded animal that just needs a little love." Is this good storytelling, or is something decidedly less benevolent going on here?

[Note the emphasis on Rey's HAND here]

The serpent's wounds are somewhat vaginal in their slashing shapes, contributing further to the sexual imagery/themes of this scene. Vaginas bleed during menstruation and while giving birth. As Rey heals this "wound," the creature groans in relief [or pleasure, hard to tell the difference.]

As I pointed out in my blog on "The Last Jedi," Rey is playing a sort of Lilith type role here. A dark goddess of the UNDERWORLD who communes with Samael. Here she is healing a serpent of the "underworld" and expressing mannerisms matching one who is in the midst of an intense sexual act. This harkens back to Rey's training with Luke in "The Last Jedi," where we noted the ubiquitous sexual innuendos in a previous blog.

Consider the suggestive symbolism here for a moment: They fell into a "hole" [sexual orifice] and ended up in a tunnel, with walls which are not "man-made" [they are inside a giant sexual orifice] saw some bones [boner/erection] and discovered a knife [a tool for piercing a body/phallus - correlates with "vaginal" wounds on the serpent] ultimately leading to a giant serpent [phallus].

[Again, emphasis on the hand]

After she heals the serpent, it immediately leaves and reveals a bright light from above, allowing them to escape the tunnels. This light above, just after Rey heals the serpent, is symbolic of the rays of god coming down, subliminally suggesting that what Rey just did was divine in origin. In this context, we are definitely not talking about the "God" of the Bible, but Lucifer - who's agent Satan tempted Eve, via the Serpent. The writers of TROS [the Rise of Skywalker] have presented us with aspects of biblical allegory within the context of Star Wars, but have put the serpent in a position of sympathy.

Note Rey's posture, and decidedly masculine, self congratulatory mannerisms as the vexis leaves. She's acting like a man who just "banged a chick really good" and is sort of relishing the moment and bragging about it. "Was nothing, I just transferred a little life over!" as she shakes out her hand, like she just got done jerking the great spiritual phallus of satan. When Jesus healed a Leper, he didn't start cracking his knuckles like Kurt Russell and say "just borrowed a little divine energy from my father and transferred it through my wrists - it's all in the reflexes!"

This entire scene seems designed to alter our perception of the serpent, as it is presented in Genesis. This follows the theme of many scenes in the recent Star Wars trilogy, which encourage MORAL AMBIGUITY within the minds of the audience.

SUB ROSA

Before encountering the vexis, C3PO notes a "Hex Charm" [note the X again] near the bones of Ochi, who is described as a "Sith Cultist" by Wookieepedia. This charm is also the logo/symbol representing Sith Eternal.

It appears to be a red diamond shape within a circle. But what abstracts the symbol specifically, are the 2 black slanted lines running parallel to the outer bottom edges of the "diamond shape." Upon first glance, nothing special really - just a cool looking insignia, right?

Although Wookieepedia describes it as a "dagger shaped" insignia, I suspected it is representative of either a flame or a flower - rendered within its' diamond shaped/triangular angles. What do flowers do? They grow outward from the center. But let's step back here...C3PO called the S.E. symbol in the vexis layer a "Hex Charm." A hex is a curse, but the word "hexa" means 6. Is there a 6 hidden here somewhere in this symbol?

The above cropped screenshot was taken from a youtube video someone made specifically about the Sith Eternal. Notice the S.E. insignia has been placed inside the First Order [hexagon] symbol. It's not exactly centered upon close examination, so I adjusted it slightly to center it a bit more precisely, to see if there were any hidden correspondences between the two [this is why the inner black "rays" might appear a bit off in the next image, as they were nudged within a cropped square containing the insignia].

Here we have cropped the image and blown it up, with the newly adjusted Sith Eternal symbol centered as well as possible within the larger hexagon. "Line A" lays horizontally across 2 upper coordinate points within the SE symbol, while "line B" lays across 4 lower coordinate points [count them]. The coordinate points crossed by "line A" are also crossed by the upper part of the blue and green diagonal lines, which connect coordinate points within the larger hexagon. The lower halves of these same slanted lines cross 2 of the same coordinate points that "Line B" does, pretty much exactly. There's also the smaller circle of the SE symbol, which matches up with the larger circle of the First Order logo. What this reveals is a clear mathematical correspondence between the 2 symbols. Is this just a coincidence?

We discussed the First Order symbol at length in my blog regarding "the Force Awakens," so I don't want to repeat too much information here. But as you can see, the First Order Logo is a hexagon, who's coordinate points can be connected with straight lines to form a perfect hexagram [or Star of David]. Now the reason I did this, was to demonstrate that not only does this large hexagram reflect the 4 outer diamond shaped angles of the inner insignia, but the inner insignia also has coordinate points which support 2 horizontal lines matching the upper blue and lower green horizontal lines of the Star of David symbol. It would be one thing to place a diamond shape within a hexagram and say "wow, look where these match up!" But the key here is those 2 black lines inside the SE symbol, which appear more or less random initially, as subtly hinted near the beginning of this section. But now we see these lines are here to exaggerate the correspondences to a larger hexagram, which "grows" out from the center.

[You must click/tap images in order to enlarge/save them at the correct resolution]

Now we've drawn lines connecting each point of the large hexagon with it's opposite point, revealing 4 coordinate points hidden within the SE insignia [2 on the left and right of it], finally revealing a unicursal hexagram. So when C3PO called this a "hex charm," that did have a double meaning. He meant HEX as-in "curse" on one level, but he was also covertly referring to the hidden HEXA [6 pointed] symbol which GROWS out of it. This is revealed by placing it inside a larger hexagon and connecting the coordinate points [where angles CROSS each other], using straight lines in different combinations.

The unicursal hexagram has very specific occult connotations, and is associated with Aleister Crowley's Thelema, the Egyptian Ankh, and the Rosy Cross [roses grow outwards]. It is nearly impossible to draw precisely freehand, and the odds of exact coordinate points randomly appearing here to reveal a unicursal hexagram in this way are basically 0.

Building off of the idea that this is a sort of stylized, geometric flower - we can say that the larger hexagram represents the older petals of the First Order which are dying out. The Sith Eternal insignia represents the smaller, as yet to bloom, newer petals of the Final Order. So this works very well not just on a mathematical level, but a symbolic/metaphorical one. And very logically in both cases. The odds of all this matching up so well randomly are astronomically low. To use a cliche phrase, "I can't make this shit up!"

THE UNHOLY TRINITY

One of the main artifacts being sought out by the most important characters in TROS is a pyramid - which they call the "Wayfinder." It's name is self descriptive. It's purpose is to help you FIND the WAY...To EXEGOL [note the X]. Only 2 were made. The first one is found by Kylo Ren during the first scene of the film, embedded within a slab of smooth ashlar. The Sith Eternal symbol is engraved UPSIDE DOWN upon the outer top ashlar housing, before Ren removes it to reveal a square within an OCTAGON. We see the bottom of the Wayfinder - which also sits upside down like the insignia engraved upon the outside ashlar cover. These details are intentional, as Rey finds the 2nd Wayfinder RIGHTSIDE-UP among the Death Star remains. What do you get when you put a triangle on top of another which is upside down? A hexagram!

Again and again these films shove occult symbolic references into our faces, and they just go uncommented upon by mainstream critics. Audiences then ignore these symbols because "well, the mainstream critics aren't commenting on it so it must not mean anything!" But all we have to do is examine this in terms of "left brain" vs "right brain" thinking, then things begin to fall into place more coherently. Symbols and abstract metaphors speak more directly to our RIGHT brain, whereas the left brain is more concerned with "facts," rational information and logic - and leans more towards focusing upon the flimsy plot, music, and awe inspiring special effects. The left brain says, "an explosion is just an explosion." The right brain says, "wow, look at the shape and color of that explosion! Reminds me of..."

Most people tend to interpret the world through the lens of their left brain, while the right brain just sorta sits there taking in all of these covert messages delivered by the mass media. In other words, we're being mentally programmed and we have no idea on a rational level, because we've never been taught to recognize reality in this way. The "mystery schools" appear to be the self proclaimed "keepers of these secrets," revealing them only to the initiated, and probably in very specific, limited ways which benefit those few at the top of their hierarchical structures. This is why the term "mystery schools" can be applied to a wide range of secret societies.

The WAYFINDER tells you how to FIND the WAY to the hidden domain of evil [Exegol/Sith Eternal] within the plot of the film. Where is the symbolic "hidden domain of evil" in the real world? Within the tip of the pyramid on the back of any US $1 bill - presumably the allegorical lair of the Illuminati. This is especially suggested when we consider the Freemasonic symbols embedded within recent Star Wars posters. The small pyramid floats above a larger truncated pyramid to emphasize the significance of the "capstone" at the top. The eye of course represents wisdom and superior insight over all that is below and above the horizon. When we consider the Sith's various phases - the New Order, the First Order, and the Final Order, against the phrase "New World Order" written in latin, also on the back of the US $1 bill under the pyramid [Novus Ordo Seclorum] - it begins to seem to me like Freemasonic Illuminists are telling us they are behind these films. And why not? Major blockbusters such as these are both immensely profitable, and superior vehicles upon which to load whatever propaganda they wish onto the unsuspecting audiences of the world. And they won't recognize it anyway, because half of it is going to be delivered symbolically/metaphorically!

["The Citadel was both underground and above ground, with the latter being a large, upside-down truncated pyramid structure made of black stone. The structure floated above Exegol's surface. A platform was used to lower someone into the underground part of the Citadel." - Wookieepedia]

Immediately after obtaining the Wayfinder, Kylo Ren crosses a red plasmic abyss in space to arrive at the dimension where Exegol resides. This plasmic abyss has an organic quality to it, and is likely a metaphor for the inner spiritual abyss the Djedi must cross before reaching the great "holy trinity" at the top of the spiritual crown/Tree of Life [represented in the Kabballah by a triangle comprised of Kether, Binah, and Chokmah]. To be clear, the film is showing us a dark REVERSAL of this divine spiritual process, reflecting the reversed morality of the Dark Side of the force Ren aligns himself with.

The image above is the fortress of Sith Lord Palpatine, which is referred to as an upside down TRUNCATED PYRAMID by Wookieepedia. I brought up the truncated pyramid in my blog regarding "The Last Jedi" pointing out the significance of this symbol within the main poster. I spoke about the Black Cube, Saturn, and the Kaaba at Mecca in my blog about the occult symbology within "the Force Awakens." Well, Wookieepedia seems to be echoing these themes, particularly with regard to the Citadel description being a truncated pyramid of "Black Stone."

"The Black Stone (Arabic: ٱلْحَجَرُ ٱلْأَسْوَد‎, al-Ḥajaru al-Aswad, 'Black Stone') is a rock set into the eastern corner of the Kaaba, the ancient building in the center of the Grand Mosque in Mecca, Saudi Arabia." - Wiki

This entire opening scene is a symbolic dark spiritual journey, which Kylo Ren is merely walking us through. When he enters the citadel, he travels straight down through the center, presumably to a "tip" that is hidden underground. We have brought up the significance of the pyramid "capstone" enough times, and the meaning when it is missing. Kylo Ren is symbolically traveling to the divine realm of the DARK Tree of Life here, to the very tip where only those elite illuminated with the dark force live.

The base of a pyramid is a SQUARE. If you draw 2 lines connecting the upper and lower corners diagonally, this forms a perfect X, whose center is in vertical alignment with the very tip of the pyramid. The platform Ren is on seems to be located directly in the center of this giant upside down truncated pyramid, and is in the shape of an octagon. Now, if you compare these symbols with those found within the Scottish Rite 29th degree, they are basically the same symbols with reversed or twisted meanings. The "Knight of Saint Andrew" crest features a knight's helmet. Kylo is a "Knight of Ren" with NO helmet. [this is before he has it put back together]. The Knight of Saint Andrew X is gold, symbolizing royalty and divine authority. Ren is being groomed by Palpatine to be the new Sith Lord, a form of DARK divine authority. This is occurring on X - Egol.

"Egol is pronounced as EHGaaL †. Egol's origin is Old Norse. Egol is a variant form of the Scandinavian name Egil...Egil is primarily used in Scandinavian and it is of Old Norse origin. Original forms of the name include Aghi (Old Norse) and Egill (Old Norse). The name was used as an Old Norse diminutive of names starting with the element 'eg' or 'ag' (meaning awe, terror, fear; edge of a sword)." - babynamespedia.com

This is no "golden X" here, it is the cursed black X of death that Ren descends down into the center of. The Knight of Saint Andrew cross emblem has an Emerald Octagon at it's center. According to venturascottishrite.org, "The emerald signifies the manliness and uprightness of chivalry, its color that of the renewal of virtue, always bright and sparkling." Ren is the opposite of UPRIGHTNESS and CHIVALRY. He is literally, DESCENDING here, upon a BLACK octagon. He is surrounded by giant skeletal druid-looking statues holding sabers/swords [Egil = Edge of Sword], further echoing themes of dark occult Freemasonry.

After facing [integrating?] her "evil twin," Rey fumbles the Wayfinder and it is stopped on the floor by what appears to be a foot. In one continuous shot, it RISES up and we find that it is actually Kylo Ren's hand which stopped the Wayfinder from tumbling upon the ground, not a foot. We noted in Pt I how the main poster for this film messed around with depth perception, and how this was a clue to unveiling the symbols hidden within it. Well, what they just did here was they messed around with your perception of limbs. You think you saw a foot at first, but it turns out to be a hand. You thought you saw a Wayfinder, but it turns out to be a pyramid. A pyramid is also at the tip of every obelisk, which is an ancient Egyptian phallic symbol. This is a phallus, and Kylo Ren just literally raised it from the ground. Recall the sun/Djed pillar mentioned earlier. He is not preparing to fight here, he is preparing to harness a phallic/sexual force, and Rey is after it like a starving animal.

A symbol as perfect and universal as a pyramid can indicate many things, depending upon context. This is true of the X and any number of symbols we discuss here. So if anyone is wondering how we jumped from a pyramid being a "capstone" to the allegorical dwelling of the Illuminati to a "phallic symbol," well it can be any of these - just as the Star of David also contains the square and compass, a hexagram, a 3D cube, or simply a triangle pointing up on top of one pointing down - specific meaning depends upon context and variations/accents in the rendering. The more times a symbol is re-enforced, the more urgent the meaning intended. The more often a specific context appears around a particular symbol, the less open to interpretation it is.

IMPALED UPON THE CROSS

Kylo then begins telling Rey how the dark side is "in our nature" and how she needs to "surrender to it." This is more or less what Rey's evil twin just got done telling her. She replies very intensely, "give it...to...me!" They are talking about a phallus here, which leads to the domain of the dark elite [Illuminati?]. Kylo then crushes it to dust, and Rey jumps at him, initiating a "fight" which is really one big sexual metaphor.

The crossing of lightsabers is a dramatic effect that never gets old in Star Wars films. The tension held in the faces, the crackling electricity between the sabers held together, the uncertainty of who will make the next move, the feeling that death or victory can occur any second. We all know this tension well, and so do the film makers. But what they have done here in TROS, is they have choreographed these scenes to provide clear "snapshots" for emphasis. Why?

The old Star Wars cliche of "who's gonna cross over to the other side" is in full effect here, but it's being clouded to include more grey areas. During Ren and Rey's many private "force conversations," a strange relationship is formed, where moral ambiguity is constantly mixed with themes of mind control, nihilism, violence, social inferiority, and sexual ambiguity. The question is, where is the line drawn between good and evil here? When it comes to Rey and Ren's relationship, they seem to exist in a dimension where good and evil CROSS and they just sorta exist there perpetually. Like a surfer on rough waters, trying to maintain stability among the uncontrollable forces of nature.

During their duel upon the Deathstar remains, Rey takes a ridiculously fake leap into the clouds practically, flies over a huge wall of splashing sea water, then lands on the opposite platform like she just scored a touchdown, ass in the air - a giant phallic looking turret pointing straight up behind her. Are we playing "spaceball" here or what?

The rough waters blasting between/around the platforms function symbolically as excited sexual fluids, subtly recalling the training scenes between Luke and Rey - which were absolutely filled with sexual innuendo. Now for those who haven't read the blog I did on "The Last Jedi," I proposed a theory that Kylo Ren's rage ultimately stems from being violated/raped by his instructor, Luke. It's not literal, this doesn't literally happen in the film. But if you watch the scene where Luke talks about "that night" when he visited Kylo Ren, with all of this in mind, the concept of a teacher raping a student becomes disturbingly fitting. And TROS has a follow up to this theme, which we will look at in a moment.

Kylo Ren then performs the same silly leap over the waters as Rey just did, and finally defeats her on the opposite platform. He then hesitates before killing her because his mother, Leia, calls to him from across the universe. In a trance, he drops his lightsaber/cross/phallus. Rey then takes advantage of the moment, and impales Kylo Ren upon his own cross/saber.

"Impale: to pierce with or as if with something pointed" - Merriam Webster

Rey then feels really bad for impaling Kylo Ren, but why? He murdered his father and tried to murder his mother for starters! He had Rey beat. The only reason she won the duel is because he got distracted by Leia contacting him through the force. During that brief moment, she had the upper hand. Rather than cut his leg or arm off, she brutally IMPALES him with a decidedly hateful intent to kill. This "hate" which she cannot always control seems to be at the center of an earlier scene, where she mistakingly thought she killed Chewbakka. Her use of "Force Lightning" inadvertently shot out of her hands, destroying a ship. We find out later this ship did NOT have Chewbakka in it after all. This was another aspect of the plot many people saw problems with. But if we assume the SYMBOLISM is more important than the plot here, it begins to make much more sense.

[Note the emphasis on HANDS here again]

The above screenshot shows Rey staring at her hand, just after having accidentally killed Chewbakka [or so she thought] Below that is a shot from "The Last Jedi." That is Luke's hand, as he recounts the night he went to Ben Solo's quarters, presumably drawn by the unshakeable feeling he was going to convert to the "dark side." Luke's tone is confessional when he tells this story, as if he carries great guilt for Ben Solo's sudden eruption from this moment, and into a mad rage of destruction, ultimately leading to his new identity as Kylo Ren.

[Hey, what'cha lookin at there Rey?]

As I showed in that blog covering TLJ [The Last Jedi], this is clearly a metaphor for a teacher molesting a student. What was meant symbolically, is that Luke raped his apprentice, Ben Solo, causing him to abandon the Jedi path and assume that of the Dark Side. The screenshot above showing his hand suggests what his intensions were as Ben slept. Sure, he could have been "feeling out" the dark force energy in the room. But it's also a symbol of Luke's intention to physically assault his unsuspecting apprentice, as if drawn by an uncontrollable desire. He says "I tried to stop it," echoing Rey's dialogue above "I lost control." In both cases, they give in to their dark side and lash out violently in an uncontrollable rage. These carefully angled shots of their hands are symbolic references to this loss of control, and serves to connect both scenarios subtly.

The purpose of the scene in TROS where Rey accidentally destroys a ship by inadvertently shooting "force lightning" from her hand, is to set up the scene above, where she looks at her hand in disbelief of her own actions. This is a mirror of Luke's actions, the raping of Ben Solo. The crime has merely been abstracted to blur the association. That is why it seems to make little sense on the surface. That may sound like a stretch, but this next section backs it up rather graphically.

[You must tap/click on the image first in order to enlarge it at the proper resolution.]

Take a good look at that hole Rey just put in Kylo Ren. What does it look like? Look at her hand, and the body language. It looks like she's about to stick her middle finger in the hole! If you go back and watch this scene, this hole actually puckers as Rey heals him. [I didn't write this stuff, just pointing it out] Now who else did Rey heal in the film? A serpent, which had vaginal shaped wounds across it's mid section. In both cases, sexual symbolism is used together with feelings of SYMPATHY encouraging the audience to question their established moral beliefs regarding such archetypes of evil. "The serpent is just a wounded creature in need of help!"..."The violent murderer just needs some love because he was raped as a child!" We're talking about sympathy for the devil here, mixed up with all kinds of demented sexual innuendo. What's going on here Disney?

Observe Rey's facial expression/body language above. That is the face of someone having intense sex, and she is TOUCHING the hole she just put in Kylo Ren at the same time! They are both "wet" from sea fluid [semen] which continues to splash about them. Is Kylo Ren's expression that of resignation to his imminent death, or is it closer to the passive attitude of a young unattractive virgin finally getting some action?

If we really wanna get to the core of this symbolism, we're talking about Rey HEALING the wound Kylo Ren suffered by his abuser [Luke]. Her impaling of him recalls the original incident almost literally. This is ironically, the closest thing to heterosexual sex that occurs in this entire trilogy, and it's all mixed up with themes of metaphorical rape, pedophilia, and the occult. Are they trying to tell us it's all the same thing? Rey's "healing" of the anus looking hole in Kylo Ren graphically tells us where the original wound was suffered on his body [they simply moved the "hole" to his chest to abstract the metaphor]. Once she heals this "wound," Kylo Ren more or less turns back into Ben Solo, which is who he was before the rape/attack. The throw away "ghost encounter" with Han Solo and the cheap death of Leia as she calls out "Ben!" are only here as surface explanations as to what is happening, which is why it comes off somewhat goofy.

The producers of this film care more about getting these symbolic messages to your "right brain" than they do about keeping the plot smart for your "left brain," because they know it doesn't really matter how "smart" the film is so long as there are some cool visuals and nostalgic references - people will still pay to go see it. The numbers at the box office indicate they are right.

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE

There is an interesting A.I. [artificial intelligence] promotional aspect to this film, which is summed up in Leia's quote early on where she states, "never underestimate a droid." Personally, I find that quote a bit creepy, and here's why...In the above image we see D-O, the "abused" droid with post traumatic stress disorder [huh?] Poe calls the droid names, hinting at the "bully" aspect D-O suffered at the hands of its previous owner. Interestingly, "DIO" [which sounds exactly like D-O] means God in Italian. Why are they calling a droid "god?" Are they trying to tell us something about Artificial Intelligence and who our "new gods" will be? Never underestimate a droid!

If you pay attention to C3PO's dialogue throughout the film, you will find beneath the comic aspect, a distinct theme of "Droids have feelings too!" This is also combined with a subtle homosexual aspect. One example is when Poe says "move your metal ass!" C3PO has amnesia at that point and cannot remember who Poe is, so he replies horrified "how dare you, we've only just met!" So if they knew each other better it would be ok for Poe to tell him when/where to move his "metal ass?"

Rey's encounter with the Aki-Aki child on the planet Pasaana seemed a bit pointless to me at first, if well shot. The puppetry/CGI is pretty amazing here, and I think the point of it all is again, part of the A.I. promotion. The realism of these alien "children" are being refined to mimic more convincing human interactions and stimulate feelings than ever before. The "mother/daughter" relationship is hinted at here, but Rey doesn't seem to be interested in romance at all during this trilogy of films - nor would her offspring ever look like this alien child. So we're talking about a mother/daughter relationship resulting from no romance or biological connection. How endearing! It's interesting to consider the "warm" feelings provoked by this scene in contrast to the themes of cloning in the film.

This bleeds into the "Baby Yoda" phenomenon, from the Star Wars offshoot Mandalorian. Honestly, I liked the show - but it is basically trash if we want to get really critical and compare it to other well written/shot shows out there currently. I suspect the main point of Mandelorian is to promote A.I., by way of making Baby Yoda a "trending" subject, likening his image to that of "cute cat pics" posted online. They want to replace your cute cat [or better yet, your child] with Baby Yoda!

"...science fiction writers have fantasized about armies of look-alikes wiping out the rest of humanity, or clones bred solely to sustain their identical ancestors. The idea of clones is unsettling because it violates the fundamental moral understanding that we are all different and equally valuable." - discover magazine.com

The concept of cloning is not new to the Star Wars universe, but takes more of a front seat here. We find out that not only was Snoke a clone, but that Emperor Palpatine himself is. This gets confusing when we consider that Rey is supposed to be his granddaughter, and the film hardly gives us an adequate explanation of all this. Although the film does provide a bit more backstory on Rey's parents, her basic human structure/identity is a bit more ambiguous now. Was her father also a clone? According to the extended Star Wars universe, yes. He was what Wookieepedia calls a "Strand-Cast clone," which is "a type of bioengineered living entity." Ok, so what does that make Rey then? The daughter of a bioengineered living entity.

transhumanism: "the belief or theory that the human race can evolve beyond its current physical and mental limitations, especially by means of science and technology." - dictionary.com

So technically, the "Force powers" of Palpatine where passed down by means of bioengineering, and ultimately created the "force sensitive hero" [Rey] who brings down the bad guys in the film. At least Luke inherited his powers the old fashioned way!

X-EGOL

Critics have pointed out the absurdity of Luke's raising of his X Wing fighter from the sea on Ahch-To. Besides the fact that a "Force Ghost" has never really been shown to have such "real life" abilities that I can remember, the ship was sitting under water rotting away for who knows how long, and just instantly seems ready to fly out to battle on Exegol. Again, symbolism is more important than "realism" here. Rey had to ride an X-Wing to X-Egol because I guess they just need to throw an X into the picture every 5 minutes or so? Upon arrival, her X-Wing does provide an effective symbolic visual reference, encouraging us to examine other shapes during this visually impressive scene upon Exegol, where the final confrontation between good and evil presumably occurs.

Above is Palpatine's immense army of Star Destroyers, and the transmitting tower which the resistance plans to destroy in order to disrupt the Sith Eternal's ability to navigate. The transmitting tower is their MAIN initial target. Now recall the thermal oscillator in TFA, the important function it served within the plot, and how it turned out to be a black hexagram. We're seeing similar occult symbolism here with this navigation tower, and similar emphasis upon it within the plot.

In PT I we looked at how the Star Destroyer fleet in the Chinese version of TROS poster resembled a bunch of flying pyramids. Well this scene right here presents a very similar perspective, with the added bonus of a square and compass! We only see this for a moment, as the arms are folding out of this position right when we arrive here on Exegol. The Sith Eternal soon realize that the Resistance plans on knocking the tower out, so they immediately transfer the navigation signal to their command ship [pyramid] - reducing the tower to a symbol with no applicable function. To me this sort of says, "we've got to put a square and compass somewhere IN the film this time. Here's how we can do it..." I was honestly shocked to see this for the first time, and it almost seems like a joke. But there it is, a square and compass, surrounded by black pyramids!

THE POINT

What is the point of all this symbolism in the film? What ties it all together?

First of all, X is the Roman numeral for the number 10. Now, look at the Masonic Knight of Saint Andrew illustration above, specifically the center of the X. Within the upside down triangle is a Hebrew character, YOD, and here is a larger version of it:

Yod is the 10th letter of the Hebrew alphabet. In Hebrew Gematria, which is the system of allocating numbers to letters, the value of Yod is also 10. What is the significance of 10? Well, given the heavy Masonic themes and symbols contained within these films, and given that Freemasonry incorporates Kabbalistic concepts and symbolism, we will look at the definition from that angle.

The Tree of Life [not to be confused with the Tree of knowledge of good and evil] is a system which can be compared to the Egyptian Djed Pillar mentioned earlier [based upon my limited knowledge of the latter]. Simply put, it is a system to help the initiate expand their soul and consciousness into a more complete, integrated, divine state. To reach God, or rather, return to a perfect state of one-ness with godliness. This Tree of Life has 10 "fruits" if you will - which are essentially steps towards the top of a divine latter. 1 would be the top, making 10 the absolute bottom. 10 [called "Malkuth"] more or less represents the physical world we live in. That's not to say it is "bad," I liken it to a frequency. Solid matter is comprised of heavier frequencies, whereas, subtle matter and stages of existence are of a higher/lighter frequency. Therefore, their state as matter becomes more akin to light or ether. Once matter become so heavy/dense, it collapses upon itself, and returns to the original state from whence it came. This process can be likened to death/rebirth. However, there is a peculiar concept of the Qliphoth, which has to do with the "shadow" side of the tree - and this gets into the concept of Lilith and these dark occult "reversals" I mentioned earlier. I believe these films are concerned with these darker concepts of the Tree of life, which I know very little about. But basically, this lowest point on the Tree of life becomes the starting point of profoundly lower depths in this system, as I understand it. Are we talking about levels of Hell here? Maybe, in this context.

The Hebrew letter YOD translates to HAND, "which is an allusion to God, for we say that God took us [tribe of Israel] out of Egypt with a mighty hand." [chabad.org]. So if we are talking about a dark reversal of this concept, the film is making a pretty profound statement here, basically indicating that a dark God is taking from a place of light, back into the dark.

This is why I pointed out these specific shots of HANDS in the film, and how these scenes tend to emphasize the moral struggle of said individual, with their dark side. It's that dark hand pulling them down, and the temptation to fall with it is curiously exploited in these films. In my opinion, it's being done in a way that is intended to be somewhat tempting or ambiguous. In other words, evil in intent.

Finally, when speaking about the Sith Eternal fortress, which is an upside down truncated black pyramid, we noted the base of it as a SQUARE. Take a perfect square, draw 2 lines, each running diagonal from one corner of the square to its opposite, and you have a perfect X. If you took that center point where both lines CROSS, and could pull it upwards, you'd have a perfect 3D pyramid. You would have symbolically "raised the Djed pillar," and that is the POINT of the spiritual journey. So what is the POINT of this film? And I ask this question both literally AND figuratively, without sarcasm. If we look at it from the basic concept of "dark side vs light side," it seems pretty clear to me.

We've noted moral ambiguity. Sexual ambiguity. Racial ambiguity. I believe this fixation on the center of the X/Cross is a metaphor for what the films are all about. The producers ultimately want viewers to assume a position in the center of this X/cross, not in any sort of "divine balance" sort of way - but more in the sense that one tries to stay balanced on a precarious surface. A decidedly AMBIGUOUS position. The tip of a pyramid is not the most solid place to be standing when we find ourselves there by chance. It's a subtle, yet critical distinction between one's natural spiritual journey to the crown of Kether, vs being hastily placed atop a pyramid where the winds of the universe howl unpredictably about and positive/negative energies rage uncontrolled by the adept. A little push, or even a strong gust of wind, and you are going to be blown out into the great wheel of time, with no COMPASS to guide you back. So where you end up is really left to the whim of whoever controls these winds.

To put it less metaphorically, I think the film wants us questioning our own beliefs to the point where we no longer have any! And at that point, we are nothing more than droids awaiting orders on what to do, where to go, how to think, how to feel. Mindless, dumbed down, passive, docile shells of people - with no firm foundation of any kind, clasping desperately to the First Order thrust upon us - up until the Final Order - which is our own descent into an endless black oblivion.

Here are some other popular blogs I have done, click to read.

The Darrell "Dimebag" Abbott Murder
The Chris Cornell Death
Star Wars and the Occult
America: Land of the Plumed Serpent
THE WATCHMEN SERIES
Mass shooting at an Eagles of Death Metal concert

This blog was researched, written, and continues to be maintained by 1 person. If you enjoyed it and would like to encourage more of them, donations can be made by clicking the button below.