There Is No Justice When It Comes To The Subject Of Survival After Death
by MICHAEL ROLL
Every decent person in the world would he fighting mad if the police charged a man or a woman with a crime, then when that person came to trial only the case for the prosecution was allowed to be presented in a public court. Thankfully, nothing like this can happen in a democratic country that has signed up to the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights. However, when it comes to presenting scientific evidence proving that we all survive death, that our minds are separate from our brains, then the public are only allowed to hear just one side of the scientific case. The one that is put forward by materialists who are adamant that the mind and the brain are the same. These powerful, so-called sceptics who have almost total control of all media and educational outlets know very well they will he demolished by public opinion immediately a balance is presented to the people of the world. At last this one-sided tyranny is coming to an end. Dr Victor Zammit's scientific case for survival after death is now on the Internet:
'A Lawyer Argues For The Afterlife' - www.victorzammit.com
This thesis incorporates such crushing proof of a separate mind and brain that if this were a court case the jury would not even have to leave the court to come down on the side survival and find against the 'Death is the end of everything' brigade. In all my writings I have always concentrated on one aspect of experimental proof of survival: materialisation phenomena backed up by recent discoveries in subatomic physics proving that reality also exists beyond our physical senses. As all good lawyers should, Dr Zammit wades in with a mountain of objective, experimental evidence covering Electronic Voice Phenomena (EVP), Instrumental Transcommunication, Computer analysis of Voice Prints, right through to Frederick Myers Cross Correspondence and, of course, full materialisation phenomena where families have been physically reunited with their 'dead' children who are now living in the etheric wavelengths.
Sorry about this cliché, but it really is game, set, match and championship to all those who say we survive death. I would not care to be in the shoes of the professional wreckers who have been censoring uncomfortable discoveries in subatomic physics solely to keep their power-structures intact. Deceiving the people is a very dangerous game to play. Let's not dignify the "experts" 'who have been censoring the truth with the respectable label of sceptic. It is essential that every man, woman and child on earth is a sceptic, but not a bigot. Being a sceptic simply means somebody who is not prepared to soak up everything teachers throw at them. Scepties are students of philosophy, always looking at both sides of the argument before making a final decision.
Until now, the public have only been allowed access to one scientific argument that our mind dies with our brain. Victor Zammit and an army of free thinkers throughout the world are no longer prepared to sit back and just watch as uncomfortable facts are blocked from even being presented to the people. This is against Article 19 of the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights: 'Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression: this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference, and to see, receive and impart information and ideas through any media regardless of frontiers.