For Queen AND Country?
The Armed Forces and the Police: They LOVE their Queen. They think when they take that oath for Queen and Country it is all wrapped into one. What FUCKING IGNORANT IDIOTS they are! While they do their duty their own families are getting SCREWED by the very woman and HER family they swear an oath to!
THAT IS THE HEIGHT OF DUMB-ASSED STUPIDITY but what’s even worse is: Even when it’s put in black and white under their noses – never mind by a blogger but later by a national newspaper (though the newspapers never paint the whole picture in one nice big gulp. They just feed it gently over months or years piece by piece – that way the big picture gets ignored by the ignorant!) – they STILL don’t get it!
So let’s look at today’s (21st April 2012) headline in the Daily Mail for starters shall we?
The real news (but just a snapshot of it) next to Cowell just to distract the attention. "Oh I don't understand wind farms etc... sounds boring anyhow... so I'll read the Simon Cowell segment". GOD this fucking country is SO THICK and yet it then moans constantly about being screwed anally!
Now, a blog I wrote over a year ago: The Crown: Profiting from your misery!
To all you STUPID “monarchists”: You bloody fools! Those parasitical scum are screwing you left right and centre while you celebrate a Diamond jubilee and wave your silly little flags as the Olympic team and English football teams sing their praises for her and her clan every time they win a fricking medal!
What is it you do not understand about the monarchy (who are MEANT to be ONLY a CONSTITUTIONAL monarchy – funny that when so many say we have no constitution!!) through their lovely little banking friends – the Crown Estate – OWN THE SEABED?
Now just before moving on, watch this little clip of the corrupt bastard you call your Prince:
What is it you do not understand about this?
UK PARLIAMENT ARCHIVES:
11 Feb 2003 : Column 245WH—continued
Seabed Management
Mr. Alistair Carmichael (Orkney and Shetland): I am delighted to have secured this opportunity to examine the workings of the Crown Estate Commission, which is one of the slightly gloomier corners of Government business. It is an area of public life that is not often overly troubled by the bright lights of public accountability, but it has a profound and real effect on the life of my constituents and many people who live in coastal and island communities throughout the United Kingdom. It was the subject of a considerable part of my maiden speech. …….
I would be delighted if the Minister were to say today that the Government will examine the question of ownership of the seabed. Such an initiative is long overdue. However, I realise that this is a Westminster Hall debate. I have been an MP long enough now to be realistic about what can be achieved. For that reason, I have asked that today’s debate be limited to the management of the seabed. Nevertheless, it never hurts to place on record my belief that it is fundamentally obnoxious that a body such as the Crown Estate Commission should exist and should exert power in the way that it does over coastal and island communities. I speak as one who represents several island communities and was born and raised in one.
It is questionable that we should allow such a body to raise money from things on which we depend, such as piers and marinas. We have no alternative but to use them, but rent is exigible by the Crown Estate Commission on them.
Now get this:
I turn to sub-sea cabling. The Minister may be aware that a project to lay a fibre optic cable between the Scottish mainland and Shetland is under consideration, although it is rather on the back burner. It would be in tune with an important Government policy on broadband to get that cable laid, and it might well be supported both financially and politically by the Scottish Executive, the Shetland Islands council charitable trust, the Shetland Islands council and the Orkney Islands council. However, if that is achieved, the Crown Estate Commission will charge no less than £64,000 a year in rent simply for the privilege of allowing that cable to lie on the seabed.
The same situation will transpire in the event that we are able to lay electricity cables to allow the export of electricity generated by tidal or wave power or wind power in the islands, which are uniquely well placed for the development of renewable energies.
SIXTY FOUR THOUSAND POUNDS RENT (PER YEAR!!) FOR A SINGLE CABLE DOING NOTHING/ZERO/NADA BUT SITTING AT THE BOTTOM OF THE SEA ON THE SEABED!
NOW work out why there is so much emphasis on OFFSHORE WINDPOWER and work out why, while the feed in tariffs for those using solar power on their houses has been dropped so dramatically last year (41p/KW to 21p/KW) while wind energy AND PARTICULARLY OFFSHORE WIND, was not hit?
Do you get it? It is SIMPLE!! While it is possible for people to receive money back from the energy providers (the feed in tariffs) for supplying the grid, the CROWN DO NOT WANT THAT AND THEY CERTAINLY DO NOT WANT YOU TO HAVE THE REMOTEST POSSIBILITY OF BEING “OFF GRID” AND SELF SUFFICIENT!
What happens when the generation of the electricity is offshore? There is NO self sufficiency and it ensures that all of our (your) energy supply is provided by the grid and NOT YOU!
Now, since the dawn of North Sea Oil, the Crown Estate have owned that because they OWN THE SEABED AND THE MINERALS – see the blog which provides the link to the FACT that Petroleum vests with the Crown!! It does so for this simple reason – the Crown owns the seabed and minerals! Doing so, the Crown has been making 12.5% “royalties” (outside of the tax paid to government coffers) from the day oil was first struck in the north sea. 12.5% of the value of EVERY barrel of oil!
Now back to the wind power: Remember that £64,000 rent for a single cable between the scottish mainland and the Isle of Skye? Well think about this:
Charlie, invest in this, go around the world promoting the doom of the planet like the young David Rothschild. Also invest in Tamar energy (biomass) with me, Jacob and Evelyn and make speeches at the EU Parliament so they know who's boss, and I assure you, you'll be the richest King ever as you screw your subjects to the fucking wall mate. Just watch the energy prices rise! 
Now consider this picture of a typical wind farm set up and all the requirements. THEN consider the number of turbines and then the number of cables between the turbines and the grid back onshore. Think about that number multiplied by at the very least £64,000 per year every year JUST FOR SITTING ON THE SEABED! Then wonder: WHO THE FUCK GAVE THE SEABED TO THE QUEEN AND THE CROWN ESTATE? THEN wonder once more about Tony Benn’s comments in Parliament regarding who or what the FUCK the Crown is in the first place? Put it all together and take a deep fricking breath!
Let's just ask one of many questions of this Crown Estate: "How many turbines are anticipated and how much is the rental PER CABLE PER YEAR for them to sit on the seabed doing FUCK ALL?"
Then, perhaps, we can also ask them how much they are charging for the rent of every single turbine itself?
NOW can you get it through your skull as to why they don’t want you generating your own electricity? But they will “create jobs” for you to create THEIR energy generating plant so that they can get you to pay for it and pay for your energy that you are working for them to generate! YOU CREATE FOR THEM AND THEY PAY YOU PEANUTS BUT THEN THEY MAKE IT WORSE BY CHARGING YOU FOR THE ENERGY YOU HELPED CREATE FOR THEM TO CHARGE YOU! DON’T YOU GET IT YET?
Now let’s just take a quick look at ONE aspect more of this:
The Crown Estate acting as a co development partner. How nice. What the FUCK does the Crown Estate know about anything? Anything at all? Nevermind the engineering of offshore wind farms. While the cost of just the development and CONSENT (consent by whom? Ah you guessed it – THE CROWN ESTATE!) is just 4% of the total cost of a 500MW wind farm. But that 4% comes to £60M! NICE!
Read the whole thing:
Now one last thing because you may read this and say “You said the Petroleum vests in the Crown and yet this says the Crown Estate doesn’t have control over the oil! So you’re wrong!!”
But listen: Even the UK bloody parliament doesn’t know who the Crown actually are! Read the blog: “Tony Benn, the straight man” - tony-benn-the-straight-man
THEN read once more: Petroleum vests with his majesty! The question then is “How many British Crowns are there?” Or is it that the Crown is something more than her majesty while she is the main focal point of it from the population’s ignorant perspective? Why, for instance, are there clauses in the Bank of England Act 1946 which are protected by the Official Secrets Act? Why is it that now, the Queen and her fucking family are being even more protected from scrutiny by this utter shit they call “law’?
Now here’s something else (how much do you actually need before that bloody penny drops you monarchical cretins?):
Charles: Richest King in history!
Republic warns of “historic stitch up” as Queen asks Parliament to allow royal funding changes
29th Jun 2011
Republic has described new plans to tie royal funding to Crown Estate revenue as an “historic stitch up” that could divert millions of pounds from public services.
The Queen today issued a “gracious message” asking Parliament to allow changes to royal funding which would see her paid a single annual grant based on a percentage of revenue from the Crown Estate. Proposals for the new “sovereign support grant” will be presented to MPs tomorrow and introduced in a new bill.
The royal household is currently funded through the Civil List and grants from several government departments.
Republic spokesperson Graham Smith said:
“The Crown Estate is not – and never has been – the personal property of the royals. The Windsors have no more right to its revenue than I do. To claim that it should fund their lavish lifestyle is deceitful and dishonest.”
“The Crown Estate is there to fund government and public services. If this deal goes through it will be a historic stitch up that will end up lining the royal family’s pockets.”
“We’ve seen that the royals are unable to keep their spending under control. The new grant is likely to lead to even greater waste with less accountability. It will give the royal household even more freedom over its finances at exactly the time when its expenditure should be more tightly controlled.”
“The office of the head of state should be funded like every other public body– through a budget agreed by Parliament and based on need.”
NOTES
Details of the funding changes are on the HM Treasury website: leg_sovereign_grant.htm.
The Crown Estate is a land and property portfolio, managed on behalf of the Government, whose surplus revenue is paid annually to the Treasury. It is the ‘hereditary possessions of the Sovereign’, not the personal possessions of the individual acting as Sovereign.
New report reveals annual cost of British monarchy ‘enough to feed an army’
23rd Jun 2011
The annual cost of the monarchy has been found to be more than the entire annual MoD food budget and the equivalent of thousands of nurses, police officers and teachers, according to a new report.
The new report by campaign group Republic has revealed that the total annual cost of the British monarchy could be over £200 million, more than five times the official figure released by Buckingham Palace.
The report describes the monarchy as ‘one of the most expensive, wasteful and financially irresponsible institutions in the world’.
The estimated cost presented in “The ‘Value for Money Monarchy’ Myth” includes security expenditure, costs of royal visits and lost revenue from the Duchies of Lancaster and Cornwall, all of which are excluded from official figures.
The key findings include:
* The estimated total annual cost of the monarchy to taxpayers is £202.4m, around five times the official figure published by the royal household (£38.3m last year).
* The official figure excludes a number of costs, including round-the-clock security, lavish royal visits and lost revenue from the Duchies of Lancaster and Cornwall.
* Civil List expenditure has increased by 94 per cent in real terms over the last two decades.
* £202.4m is equivalent to 9,560 nurses, 8,200 police officers and more than the total annual Ministry of Defence spending on food. The total cost is also equivalent to a number of high profile government cuts, including cuts to the Sure Start programme.
* The British monarchy is 112 times as expensive as the Irish president and more than twice as expensive as the French semi-presidential system.
* Britain’s royal family is the most expensive in Europe at more than double the cost of the Dutch monarchy.
* Taxpayers are kept in the dark about the exact cost of the monarchy, due to the royal household’s exemption from the Freedom of Information Act and widespread misunderstanding about the nature of the royal family’s finances.
Republic will be holding a protest outside the gates of Buckingham Palace on Saturday June 25 at 1pm to raise awareness of the cost of the monarchy. The protest will go ahead despite the decision by the royal parks agency to withhold formal permission.
Republic’s campaign manager Graham Smith said:
‘This report cuts through the spin and shows beyond doubt that the British monarchy is a colossal waste of public money. The royals have shown that they are simply incapable of reining in their spending – they will continue to waste taxpayers money until the government stands up to them.’
‘In pointing out the scale of waste here we’re calling for an immediate start to opening up royal accounts. It’s time for the government to take control of the monarchy’s budget, pay the Queen a salary and make the royal household fully accountable to taxpayers.’
‘Every year we go through the charade of Palace press officers telling us what great value the monarchy is. It’s time for the royals and politicians to come clean – spending hundreds of millions of pounds on one family is morally indefensible, especially at a time of painful cuts.’
NOTES
For further information or comment contact Graham Smith on 07747 608 770 or graham@republic.org.uk
The report is available to download from www.republic.org.uk/royalfinances
The protest will go ahead outside the gates of Buckingham Palace at 1pm on Saturday June 25.
Visitors have been mesmerised by the quality that pervades every aspect – thanks to the demanding eye of a man who, in every aspect of his life, operates at the highest level.
The Rothschilds have always been well connected – Lord Rothschild’s son, Nat, has been the subject of media speculation after entertaining George Osborne and Peter Mandelson on the oligarch Oleg Deripaska’s yacht – but this family does not court publicity, preferring to operate through a network of connections behind the scenes. Indeed, Lord Rothschild rarely gives interviews, even about a subject as close to his heart as Waddesdon.
The purpose is to provide an archive and a conference centre, holding meetings on “subjects of interest to mankind, such as climate change, the environment, the Middle East, investment. Ten years ago I held a conference with Warren Buffet and people were queuing to come. I intend to do more of those, perhaps with the Saïd Business School at Oxford.
Lord Rothschild: My manor from heaven.
Now, it is significantly, the very last paragraph of this which is of immense interest and very telling. You see, the conference old Jacob refers to which he held 10 years ago is that conference at Waddesdon Manor which Arnold Schwarzenegger attended shortly before running for Governor of California. Furthermore, even more telling is the transcript of that meeting which was reported in the Times shortly thereafter. It was this:
Read it ( They knew! ) and recognise that these bastards not only knew what was coming but they planned it years before while the British Government (yes, even the UK chancellor, Alistair Darling, suggested he did not see the financial crash coming until 2007/2008. If not, then he was never obviously, “in the know”. You see, the Labour party (the left wing of the bird) pumped the bubble up (Tony and Gordon knew exactly what they had to do) and the right wing of the same bird (you see they are both run by the same people at the top) then imposes the austerity while there is no need for a national debt in the first place! See previous blogs on this proving it!
And lastly, Charlie linking up with the Rothschilds to invest in the very scam they preach is necessary to “SAVE THE WORLD”.
Charles’ Rothschild links and the screwing of a nation.
I mean, my apologies to those of you who still can’t quite grasp this but you must be as thick as dog shit not to understand what is and has been going on here for a very long time!
There was a reason I rewrote this song. Tongue in cheek yes but absolutely true nevertheless:
National Geographic: Who owns the moon? Could Richard Branson?
You may think this is crazy but just you watch!
Climate Change: Lord Rothschild will make it all go away!
DEAR LORD ROTHSCHILD, IF SCOTLAND, ENGLAND, IRELAND AND WALES, SELL ALL OUR NATIONAL ASSETS TO YOU FOR YOUR EXPLOITATION AND CONTROL, WILL YOU PLEASE ENSURE CLIMATE CHANGE DOES NOT EFFECT THE BRITISH ISLES?
Jacob: YES MY SON.
Is Alex Salmond your man?
Jacob: YES MY SON.
Jim Hume (Liberal Democrat)
Needless to say, I am delighted to participate in the debate, which highlights the success of the Lib Dem-led campaign to save our forests. Roseanna Cunningham showed excellent timing when she announced the U-turn on the morning of the upbeat Lib Dem conference, so I thank her for that.
As Sarah Boyack was correct to say, it is time to move on, and the Liberal Democrat amendment does so constructively. What we witnessed in the past few months was not about new inventive ideas to tackle climate change or being creative, although those terms were drummed into us; rather, a brazen and reckless attempt was made to undermine one of Scotland’s most valuable assets by selling it off to the highest bidder.
Throughout the discussion, the Government resorted to petty personalised attacks on the Liberal Democrat campaign and treated industry, individuals and organisations—indeed, anyone who disagreed with its so-called great proposal—with contempt. Mike Russell even accused others of being theatrical. Such an attitude from a minister is shocking and, considering the potential impacts of leasing on Scotland and the scale of what was proposed, it was sheer arrogance to assume that the proposal could be pushed through Parliament by piggybacking on the simplistic idea that it would solve all our climate change problems.
Throughout the debate in January, Mr Russell accused the Liberal Democrat contribution and response to the consultation of being “fact free”. He said:
“There is nothing so dishonourable as politicians who don’t do their homework while confidently trotting out wildly inaccurate statements for political benefit.”—[Official Report, 29 January 2009; c 14498.]
In fact, the Liberal Democrat response has proven to be entirely accurate and has reflected the views of land-based organisations, tourism providers, foresters and wood processors at every stage. Those businesses have been in serious limbo since last November and, in January, 19 of the main wood processors sent the minister a letter stating exactly that. That limbo was due to the Government’s mad proposal and to the Tories, who did not stand up against it initially and made their U-turn only after their Scottish National Party masters. Mike Russell ignored everyone, decried their expertise and passed them off as scaremongers who did not do their homework—what arrogance and ignorance.
Throughout the debate, references were made to the Stern report, but nowhere in that document did Lord Stern conclude that 100,000 hectares of Scotland’s most commercially viable forests should be sold to the Rothschild banking group for a notional sum of up to £200 million for 75 years. In that same debate, Mike Russell pronounced in prophetic fashion:
“Although leasing is not a new idea, I believe that its time has come.”—[Official Report, 29 January 2009; c 14497.]
Its time had come—its time to be buried with all the SNP’s other misguided flights of fancy.
Who would have thought that, within a month, Mr Russell would be removed from his minister’s position, obviously for flogging that dead horse? I welcome the new minister’s U-turn, even though Ms Cunningham had thought the leasing proposal a “cunning plan” in January. I am sincerely relieved that sense has prevailed: the decision has removed the guillotine of uncertainty that was hanging over rural communities, which can now invest for the future.
It is now time to move on. We have an opportunity to implement, under the Forestry Commission’s stewardship, sensible measures that will generate income for renewables, access, tourism and new tree planting and will guarantee the wood supply for our businesses. The Government should now concentrate on doing its best for Scotland through real and tangible measures to tackle climate change.
I move amendment S3M-3727.4, to insert at end:
“and further calls on the Scottish Government to introduce a comprehensive sustainable land-use strategy, taking into account the strategic economic, social and environmental impacts and benefits of forestry, agriculture, recreation and other land uses and setting out, where appropriate, the contribution each can make in dealing with the consequences of climate change.”
What we need is OFFSHORE Solar!
Since when did you ever hear of Solar plants being built in the North Sea and throughout the UK’s offshore interests?
You didn’t did you? What a STUPID idea Earthling!
And indeed it is! Absolutely ridiculous!
And that is why the UK is now cutting Solar incentives! You see, while the Green renewable age began with the Club of Rome’s “Limits to Growth” (a MUST read for all you Friends of the Earth and Greenies) followed by “The first Global Revolution” we can’t possibly have this:
“In a time of economic gloom, the solar industry has been one of the UK’s brightest success stories, enabling homes and communities across the country to free themselves from expensive fossil fuels.”
Because that isn’t what this game is about you silly “Environmentalists” who support 350.org etc (Rockefeller funded organisations). It’s not to FREE you! How extraordinarily naive of you! Why would those who dreamed up this entire scheme and who own and control the world’s energy resources, wish to then allow you to live freely of them? Are you seriously nuts?
The game is to “reinvent” energy but in a way that these people will still control it whether it is natural Free energy from wind or from sea or solar. If we all became self sufficient for goodness sakes, these people would lose $billions if not $trillions. Come on folks! Think will you? Finally?
WHO OWNS THE SEABED?
THE CROWN OWNS THE SEABED!
NOW WHAT WOULD HAPPEN TO ALL THAT INCOME FROM THE OFFSHORE WINDFARMS WHICH THE CROWN DERIVE ROYALTIES FROM IF THEY BECAME OBSOLESCENT AND EVERYONE WAS FREE OF THE NATIONAL GRID?
COME ON NOW. IT ISN’T DIFFICULT!
YOU CAN’T DO THAT TO THE CROWN! YOU CAN’T REMOVE THEIR SOURCE OF PROFITABILITY! THEY TOOK OWNERSHIP OF THE OIL AND GAS AND COAL FOR ALL THESE YEARS/DECADES AND HAD YOU PAY FOR YOUR ENERGY FROM NATURALLY OCCURRING SOURCES. THEY’RE NOT GOING TO ALLOW YOU TO TAKE THE SUN AND WIND FROM THEM EITHER!
WHILE, IN THE UK, WHERE DO THEY WANT THE INVESTMENT GOING?
WINDPOWER!
WHY?
BECAUSE THEY ARE FOCUSING ON OFFSHORE – THE SEABED – ROYALTIES!
Have a read: the-crown-is-profiting-from-your-misery-fuel-bills-anyone
WHEN DID YOU EVER SEE A SOLAR PANEL FARM ON THE SEA?
OFF GRID: DANGEROUS! NO EDF, NO SCOTTISH POWER, NO ROYALTIES!
ON GRID: PERFECTLY ACCEPTABLE! EDF, SCOTTISH POWER, YOU NAME IT!
And here was you thinking Monopolies were illegal! It’s not only the monopoly of currency issuance by the Bank of England but also the total monopoly of the National Grid. Are you beginning to see why?
Engagements
HC Deb 14 February 1995 vol 254 cc792-6 …
Mr. Blair Following the Prime Minister’s welcome commitment last Thursday to reducing inequality, may we now put it to the test? As the national electricity grid is an absolute monopoly subject to no competition, will the right hon. Gentleman act against the excesses of the few regional electricity chiefs who stand to make £50 million out of share options on the back of it?
§The Prime Minister I have to say to the right hon. Gentleman that I find much of his opposition to share options rather synthetic since a good deal of his leadership campaign was financed out of the proceeds of share options.
Now one must remember, reading the above, that your Energy “supplier” does not supply at all. THAT is a “legal fiction” and they don’t like you to appreciate that! If you “change suppliers” do you think for one moment you are getting a completely different supply of gas and electricity through your system? It ALL comes from the same source and that source is the National Grid. It is the National Grid which is your SUPPLIER. So your “supplier” (and for that matter, the government) are letting you, in your ignorance, believe little fables. The Energy “suppliers” are basically a consortium of Customer service and maintenance people who provide you with “competition” on tariffs from exactly the same source!
There’s a lot more about that little angle but perhaps for another blog sometime!
High Court application against UK solar incentive cuts
12 December 2011
The UK High Court has agreed to hear applications by Friends of the Earth and solar companies Solarcentury and HomeSun for permission to challenge Government plans to slash financial incentives for solar electricity on Thursday 15 December 2011.
By Kari Williamson
Confirmation of the hearing follows an earlier High Court ruling rejecting permission for a legal challenge. The organisations are now asking the High Court to reverse the decision and allow a hearing into the legal challenges regarding solar incentive cuts as soon as possible.
Friends of the Earth is also asking the High Court to cap its potential legal costs for the case. International rules specify that costs should be limited in public interest cases on the environment.
The legal challenges centre around the plans by the UK Government to slash feed-in tariff subsidies for solar photovoltaic (PV) installations completed after 12 December this year.
The Government is currently running a consultation into feed-in tariffs – but the 12 December cut-off point comes two weeks before the consultation ends.
Friends of the Earth’s Executive Director Andy Atkins, says: “We strongly believe Government plans to abruptly slash solar subsidies are illegal, we hope the High Court agrees to allow our case to be heard as soon as possible.
“We’ve also asked the High Court to cap our potential costs. International rules say this should be allowed in public interest cases on the environment – we can’t afford to bring a challenge if we face unlimited liability for the other side’s legal fees.
“In a time of economic gloom, the solar industry has been one of the UK’s brightest success stories, enabling homes and communities across the country to free themselves from expensive fossil fuels.
“It’s short sighted for Ministers to move the goalposts and prematurely pull the subsidy – this will cost tens of thousands of jobs, bankrupt businesses and reduce Treasury income by up to £230m a year.”
GOOD LUCK FRIENDS OF THE EARTH!
Meanwhile, you may want to give this a little ponder because, once this infrastructure is in, there is no need to pay tariffs to Energy companies. It is truly self sustaining with just the need for maintenance. And very little of it.
Once the investment is sunk, why is there need for ongoing bills?
The answer: There isn’t!
The Crown is profiting from your misery! Fuel bills anyone?
Perhaps it does require spelling out:
The Queen owns the seabed – see the Daily Mail article – she does.
The Queen owns mineral rights all across the country AND beneath HER seabed.
The petroleum (oil) in the ground and in the seabed is vested in the sovereign – Just like the seabed is owned by the Queen (and she profits from it) the oil pumped out of her owned seabed (the UK Continental shelf) is licensed and she will profit from it. She effectively then owns the oil rights because no-one can touch her seabed unless she allows.
Now, think why our oil is all exported and we import all our requirements.
If she were to allow the use of her oil (our oil) within the UK, we would have no problems when the price of oil spiked now would we?
BUT – and here’s the BIG BUT – her “Majesty” would lose the profits within an international market where,as things stand, “her” oil can be sold to the most profitable markets.
Who benefits from that? The British people?
OH NO!!
And THAT is why we export our oil rather than use it for our own consumption!
Meanwhile:
The Crown not only owns the seabed, minerals an oil within it but the Crown also owns the Nuclear industry.
“The British Nuclear Company and all its property, rights and liabilities shall remain wholly owned by the Crown”.
british-national-nuclear-corporation#S6CV0150P0_19890405_HOC_354
Your fuel bills are going through the roof and the Crown owns and controls it all!
QUEEN BITCH ONCE MORE. Profits from exporting oil from HER seabed WHILE she demands her government to promote green tech and windfarms in the UK and, AGAIN, only built on her seabed so she profits from that too.
Our Queen is a CON ARTIST!
Do they know it’s Christmas? (Fleece the world)
It’s xmas time, and Rothschild demands austerity
the credit cards pile on the debt to make the bankers’ day
And as pockets are so empty, the government’s on the take
Waste what’s left on more shit at xmas time
But they don’t care don’t think of you or anyone
the World bank and IMF are just having fun
But do you know just who controls them and creates the dread and fear?
Where the only money flowing is to them so let’s be clear
And the traitors in westminster from the christian to the jew
Thinking “rich thank god” its them instead of you!
And the kids won’t get their hoped for gifts this xmas time
coz Goldman sachs bribed our political scum just fine
when the government borrows the cartel provide the loans
You won’t know it’s xmas time at all
Here’s to you: Where you’re taxed on everything
Here’s to them: Where the banks bribed everyone
Rothschild & co don’t give a damn at all!
Fleece the world
Fleece the world
Fleece the world, let them know it’s austerity time
Fleece the world, just like 1929
Fleece the world, goldman sachs are paid just fine
Fleece the world Greenspan joined Paulson in time
Fleece the world who cares if it’s xmas time
Fleece the world Mandelson knew all the time
Fleece the world Blair stepped down just in time
Fleece the world Clarke invested just in time
Fleece the world let them know it’s austerity time
Fleece the world who cares if it’s xmas time
SPECIAL THANKS TO JULIAN FOR HIS FLASH & PHOTOSHOP WORK!
The little righteous Lib Dems – the duped holier than thou crew..
They’ll stand behind their messiah, especially if he takes a moment or two to make them feel special. She can live on the story of standing behind the man as he pushes crap called “Climate Change” and she’ll (and so many like her) will back him all the way because she doesn’t scratch the surface of this deceiving, careerist little shit….
They will stick to arguments like “but we need to do something – you must be selfish if you don’t care for the environment and you’re happy with all these oil companies and big business….. bla bla bla” And it will go on. They will make the necessary assumptions and create the “strawman” that you must be for desecration of the planet while HE and people like him, hide behind the false accusations based on an individual saying “it’s bullshit” by twinning that somehow with saying “it’s ok to destroy the planet”. But the individual isn’t saying that. What the individual is saying is “IT IS A MANUFACTURED, CORRUPT MANIPULATION OF FACT PRECISELY FOR THE CORPORATIONS AND THE OIL COMPANY AND BANKING OWNERS WHO WISH TO DESTROY THE ECONOMY SO THEY MAY REBUILD IT”.
I know, it sounds ridiculous doesn’t it? I can hear you all now: “Where’s the proof of that? Where’s the documentation/evidence”. That’s what all the little minded people say all the time. As if there will be a gold leafed document stating “Here is our dastardly plan”. After all, the CIA and FBI come up with documentary evidence all the time for use on the media to show 19 hijackers flew planes into buildings. After all, passports are found in almost perfect condition after flying out of a plane in a fireball about 80 floors up a Twin tower and while nothing else remains much of anything, Mohammad Atta’s passport remains. Amazing isn’t it? and the FBI come up with the “proof” of things all the time (for a short while until time proves they lied through their gold leafed teeth!).
So then, why no document with the big plan of the con of Climate Change? Or the orchestration of a depression?
Well, because you only find “indisputable evidence” when that’s what they want you to believe. THEY AIN’T STUPID!!
But I digress….
Ok, let’s see now: Keith Briffa, Phil Jones and friends commit fraud on the grandest scale imaginable in manipulating the climate data and you’re STILL pushing the propaganda?
Are your “green” followers aware of the following I wonder?
The Club of Rome is an influential think tank that guides the UN in its policies. It was none other than Al Gore who hosted the 1989 Club of Rome meeting in Washington DC, only a year or so before the First Global Revolution was published indicating ‘global warming’ was a serious crisis. Here is an exact quote…..
“In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. All these dangers are caused by human intervention, and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy then, is humanity itself.”
See Chapter V – The Vacuum, First Global Revolution, Club of Rome (1991)
Are your “green” followers (who haven’t a clue how they are being duped) aware of who has funded and continues to fund the 350.org protests?
Just the biggest capitalist and oil family in the world: The Rockefeller Foundation.
Are your “green” followers ALSO aware that the UN (of which the IPCC is a part) was originally funded and STILL funded/supported by? The Rockefeller Foundation.
If your followers are even at all interested in how they are getting duped, perhaps they would wish to research further into all the connection? Perhaps they would like to be aware of the Bilderberg Group (Yes Simon, THAT group).
If and once they do and then wonder what the Bilderberg Group have to do with this then perhaps they would wish to take note of the following:
LORD SAINSBURY: BILDERBERGER – STEERING COMMITTEE MEMBER
LORD REES: BILDERBERGER – ATTENDEE
Then if they wonder who these people are, perhaps this may enlighten them?
Prof. Alan Thorpe Chief Executive, Natural Environment Research Council who meets with Lord Sainsbury quite frequently to discuss “issues”.
Lord Rees President, the Royal Society.
Perhaps they would also like to watch the following:
19f9c335-b023-4a40-9453-a98477314bf2
Would you like me to go on? and on….and on…and on…..
But then you know how people are Simon. They hate being taken out of their strongly held belief systems even when faced with facts.
But, finally, what about these specific sections from the CRU emails Simon?
From: John Daly
To: n.nicholls@BoM.Gov.Au
Subject: Re: Climatic warming in Tasmania
Date: Fri, 09 Aug 1996 20:04:00 +1100
Cc: Ed Cook , NNU-NB@palais.natmus.min.dk, k.briffa@uea.ac.uk, Mike Barbetti
, zetterberg@joyl.joensuu.fi, rjf@dar.csiro.au
Dear Neville,
You mentioned to me some time ago that in your view, the 11-year solar cycle did not influence temperature. There have been numerous attempts by academics to establish a correlation, but each has been shot down on some ground or other. I remember Barrie Pittock was especially dismissive of attempts to correlate solar cycle with temperature.
Have you tried this approach?………..
then..
Attachment 4 shows the original Sydney data overlaid against the 11-year periodicity.
It would appear that the solar cycle does indeed affect temperature.
(I tried the same run on the CRU global temperature set. Even though CRU must be highly smoothed by the time all the averages are worked out, the 11-year pulse is still there, albeit about half the size of Sydneys).
Stay cool.
John Daly
Or what about this one Simon:
Here is an example of the “settled science” of AGW. In one of the emails from the CRU “hack” by Dendrochronologist Edward Cook who states the following:
“Without trying to prejudice this work, but also because of what I almost think I know to be the case, the results of this study will show that we can probably say a fair bit about 100 year variability was like with any certainty (i.e. we know with certainty that we know fu**-all).”
I guess “fu**-all” is a climatological term for “the science is settled”. Total admission their whole theory is busted!
Yet you’re all desperate to impose the Carbon Tax as a further step toward the New world Order Banking system of government.
What’s YOUR cut Simon?
Here is an example of the “settled science” of AGW. In one of the emails from the CRU “hack” by Dendrochronologist Edward Cook who states the following:
“Without trying to prejudice this work, but also because of what I almost think I know to be the case, the results of this study will show that we can probably say a fair bit about 100 year variability was like with any certainty (i.e. we know with certainty that we know fu**-all).”
I guess “fu**-all” is a climatological term for “the science is settled”. Total admission their whole theory is busted!
Climate Change and the MP – Stunning debating skills! (Not)
The following demonstrates, I hope, CLEARLY what we are up against when we try to even have our Government representatives even acknowledge there could be some issue in their AGW Climate Change “belief”. The reason for this cannot be logically arrived at except on one basis alone: It is a political stance and a political ploy to introduce Carbon Taxation and a plethora of other policies to both, reconstruct the economy and re-orientate society while the Banking and political elite cash in enormously.
Now, Mark Lazarowicz isn’t exactly a political “elite” BUT he has a nice little place within politics and it keeps his paycheck arriving. The same goes with this Ms Ruddock. Both heavily involved in the government climate camp.
BUT, read well. Because, while they use NOAA and NASA as their “highly respected organisations” (and who would argue with that right? After all, some twat from Edinburgh doesn’t exactly impact on the richter scale re who these people should listen to when compared with NOAA and NASA), these organisations themselves are now telling us the CO2 equation is all wrong. So the question raised to Ms Ruddock and Mr Lazarowicz is this: IF YOU LISTENED BEFORE, WHY AREN’T YOU LISTENING NOW?
Three guesses!
Meanwhile, note the response to the follow up. “I don’t agree”. They’ll give you the original response but if you follow up and tear that response apart, then you simply don’t get a further response except from a little sheepish MP who says “I don’t agree”. Can you imagine debates in the UK Parliament based upon “I don’t agree”? How would ANYTHING be agreed upon? Do they debate in there or do they just get “whipped”?
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: Earthling
> To: lazarowiczm@parliament.uk
> CC: darlinga@parliament.uk; cammy.day@edinburgh.gov.uk; allan.jackson@edinburgh.gov.uk; gillana@parliament.uk; daviesk@parliament.uk; tellnigel@hotmail.com; griffithn@parliament.uk; barrettj@parliament.uk
> Subject: Reply to you letter 21 January 2010
> Date: Sat, 30 Jan 2010 21:17:59 +0000
>
> Mark,
>
> You’ve never met me so I can’t say whether, according to you, I look like an idiot! While you seem to wish to continue to treat me like one!!
>
> I’m seriously becoming tired of your lip-service and your continuous lack of any debate on any topic I put to you. I don’t think I’m the idiot here though.
>
> 1. The response from the Energy and Climate Change Minister, Joan Ruddock MP, is a standard letter, obvious by the fact that it it refers to an un-named constituent with a space left for YOU (probably) to write in the name of your constituent which, even then, you omitted! It’s of great interest then, that there exists such a “standard” response for it clearly demonstrates that the Department feel it is necessary and suggests you/they are receiving a hell of a lot of communication from people stating the same issue – that Climate Change is COMPLETELY BOGUS!!
>
> 2. Even MORE to the point, do you think for one moment, considering the number of “scientists”, MPs (as in the case of Ms Ruddock), delusional activists etc who have a stake in this propaganda that someone like Ms Ruddock who works within something known as “THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY AND CLIMATE CHANGE” is going to turn around and say or do anything to suggest that her whole raison d’etre is without justification?
>
> Do You? Seriously? And do you expect me or anyone else to accept this?
>
> Neither Ms Ruddock nor yourself know a thing about Climate Science! Ms Ruddock is as conditioned into believing the claptrap as you are AND she makes a living out of it so why question it right? I can see the headlines now:
>
> “Joan Ruddock, British Climate Change Minister, admits Climate Change is a fraud and is wholly based upon the need for the government to create further tax on the population, in part due to the enormous debt burden the government has built up by unnecessarily having UK currency supplied by a cartel of International Bankers rather than issuing it’s own true British currency. This debt, meanwhile, is proving itself unable to be serviced by a country which now has no significant industry to speak of and, therefore, who’s GDP is not only not growing but is unlikely to see any real growth at all for years to come. The Banks are bailed out to the tune of £billions, aid is sent all over the world to the tune of £billions, yet the UK government cannot (will not) invest in its own people’s education, healthcare, industry and business BECAUSE the Banks (who are NOT controlled by the government but who control the government in essence through the government’s acceptance of the terms of the IMF) will not lend to the taxpayer who bailed them out!”
>
> Now, as for the detail of this piece of absolute rubbish contained in the letter:
>
> The CRU “is just one of a large number of highly respected (my emphasis) scientific research groups…”
>
> Groups, such as your own Labour Party and “Government” (if that is what you wish to be referred to as) are comprised of people. So let us take a look at some of these people who comprise these “highly respected” groups. Then you may wish to consider who you collaborate with and treat as “friends” or “acquaintances” or as “highly respected”:
>
> Phil Jones -climategate-professor-phil-jones-could-face-ten-years-on-fraud-charges#comments
>
> So there is one major “component” of the “authoritative evidence base” which “inform(s) our policy development”.
>
> Note, the author of the above piece is actually a rather intelligent friend of mine by the name of John O’Sullivan. Like you, Mark, he’s a Lawyer but he practices his trade!
>
> Michael Mann – climategate-scientist-received-over-half-a-million-from-obama-stimulus-package.html
>
> As for your statement regarding “Peer review”; It is a well established fact that there are over 30,000 scientists whose views are suppressed by the IPCC and “Peer review” BECAUSE they disagree entirely with the idea of AGW or their research does not support the findings! As the above article shows (and is fully understood), the vast amounts of money being injected into the IPCC and it’s main protagonists to “research” AGW and come up with the “right” results is rather significant and a Mann or a Jones and their “Peers” are certainly not going to allow any research which is going to question their findings and lose them all that investment now are they? After all, they are the “God’s” of Climate Change “science”.
> So, as an example, here is a little piece on your “peer reviewed” ideas. Just one of a great many:
>
> http://jamesdelingpole.com/2010/01/28/more-integrity-from-the-robust-peer-reviewed-ipcc-not/ (since the email, this has been removed by Delingpole yet other articles remain?)
>
> And Mark, as for NASA and NOAA, you don’t have a clue do you? You don’t even ATTEMPT to keep up to date do you? And neither, it seems does Ms Ruddock!! I can only guess that her standard letter was written some time ago:
I quote:
NASA and NOAA are organizations from which many of true believers in the global warming religion have come, and they’ve played a critical role in providing the scientific-sounding justification for the worst of the alarmist predictions. But now scientists from NOAA have published research in Science that challenges the core assumptions of the global warming camp:
An increase in atmospheric water vapor is responsible for at least a third of the average temperature increase since the early 1990s, say scientists at the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). Susan Soloman, the respected climate scientist who lead the research, says that this finding does not undermine man-made global warming theories. “Not to my mind it doesn’t,” she said. Soloman did point out thatthe research does allude to human emissions having a much smaller role in climate change than previously thought, and serves as a warning to climate modelers who “over-interpret the results from a few years one way or another.” Despite Soloman’s personally held belief, the NOAA study is expected to give further ammunition to climate skeptics working to draw public attention to perceived flaws in man-made global warming theories.
Soloman is careful to be polite to the global warming believers, but a few months ago, this research would not had even seen the light of day. We know from the Climategate emails that climatologists had conspired to suppress research that challenged the orthodoxy. Apparently they’re not able to do that any longer.
Soloman has opened the door by saying in no uncertain terms that the fundamental assumption in global warming dogma, that carbon dioxide is the most important factor in global warming, is simply not true:
Soloman did point out that the research does allude to human emissions having a much smaller role in climate change than previously thought…
Well, isn’t that we’ve been saying all along? Isn’t that a statement that guaranteed you the label of “denier”?
> Read it Mark: steve-janke-more-unsettling-science-in-the-global-warming-camp.aspx
>
> I’m suggesting you read all of this because Mark, I’m telling you, whether by apathy or by ignorance or by an invested interest in one form or another, you, by your constant rhetoric of “I’m convinced and that’s all that matters” when presented with this information which presents you with facts which kill your arguments, are, perhaps inadvertently, colluding with a fraud.
>
> NOAA/NASA now admit they have NOT found the “same trends”!! They are clinging tenuously to “warming” even though the earth has NOT warmed in the last DECADE, while they NOW say absolutely emphatically, that CO2 is NOT the issue! The ENTIRE Climate Change fable has been based on increasing CO2. YOUR GOVERNMENT have introduced CO2 taxes based on this! But YOUR government don’t have the BALLS to admit your input was false and fraudulent!
>
> The “economic analysis” showing “investing in a low carbon society” to protect us is based on absolute GARBAGE as your own “authoritative evidence based” sources are now coming out and stating!! The “economic” and “investing” crew is what this whole SCAM is about!
>
> As for “irresponsible” – It is people like YOU and Ms Ruddock, in your ignorance and apathy who are entirely irresponsible!
>
>
> This, as so many other elements impinging upon the UK (and globally) today, is all due to the fact our government is entirely owned and controlled by the Banking cabal. The control is simple and it is total. YOU, Mark, are nothing but a cog in a wheel of a car. Ms Ruddock is but another one. The IPCC scientists are others. The entire UK political system and establishment is corrupted and you people collaborate within that corruption, generally in ignorance of it because you work within your own little box.
>
> You deal with me as a constituent. No other MP will communicate with me because I am not their constituent. This happens up and down the country. It is one form of control of information and who can communicate with who. Your responses to me have absolutely no interest in what I am saying to you because the questions and facts I put to you are too difficult and will cause YOU issues. You do not answer to me or your constituents (although you should). You simply toe your party line otherwise you don’t have a job! The same goes for Ms Ruddock! You ensure your own survival – Period!
> So that is how YOU are controlled. The control mechanisms are there all the way to the top.
>
> If there are any significant Parliamentary motions to be voted on across parties (such as the EU referendum), the government’s wish is granted due then to a party whip system AND a collusion between parties! There is NO difference between Ken Clarke and Peter Mandelson as Business Secretaries! They both bow to the same masters! Bilderberg! Even George Osbourne is being groomed by the Rothschild/Bilderberg lot. Cameron too! You’re ALL owned by the Bilderberg/Banking crew who use the IMF to dictate to the UK, as to other countries, how the government spends its money. Its money which is created by debt, the debt owned by the Banks. How difficult is this for you to comprehend? Brown and Cameron etc are puppets! It’s pathetic!
>
> The Labour/Tory game at the end of the day is a struggle to see which one can pitch the best “solution” for the bankers. Decades ago there was some semblance of a divide between the two parties but today there is none. The TV/Media portrayal is all contrived whereas the two parties (forget the Limp Dems for now but they play their part too) are so close in policy because they HAVE to be to stay within the confines the Globalists want!
>
> So, yes, you’re a cog in a wheel. The car is built up of wheels plus engine and transmission etc and the passengers are the population while the engine is the government, the NGO’s the transmission etc. But, at the end of the day, the guy in charge of the steering wheel guiding the car are the banks/International Bankers/IMF. That car is being steered directly toward the edge of a cliff but the guy in the driver’s seat will bail out just before the edge – just as the Banks got bailed out. Meanwhile, the passengers can’t bail out because of the child locks.
>
> But you’re a cog in the wheel Mark and you’re as dispensable as the rest of us. You’ll never accept that however because then you’d have to do something about it. The fear you have of not being “MARK LAZAROWICZ MP” any longer ensures you’ll never act however. It’s so much easier to ignore people like me.
>
> Now, I wonder why, thus far, 130 MPs are standing down? Any chance it’s because they recognise there is no real job left for a politician these days? Any chance they recognise that they are cogs in those wheels? Possibly they no longer wish to deal with the trash we are going to be saddled with from an unelected government in the EU which Mandelson and Clarke, as Bilderbergers (plus others such as our “esteemed” ex PM Blair and the incumbent) worked so hard to achieve while the rest of you look on scratching your heads trying to work out what’s going on then, as the penny dropped, just wished to hold on to whatever you could in your career within the corrupt “industry” you’re in.
>
>
>
> Quick question: Is Nigel Griffiths an odd job man? A jack of all trades?
>
> Potholes, street cleaning, loose paving slabs, broken streetlights, blocked drains, abandoned cars, unfinished road works which appear to have been abandoned…..
>
> If you have a major issue Tell Nigel and he will do what he can to help.
>
> Contact Nigel Today…….
>
> http://www.nigelgriffiths.co.uk/690be220-929b-0cf4-dd26-07921acbd5eb
>
>
> Just don’t bother him with anything REALLY serious right?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Lastly, I STILL have no response on that pathetic, arrogant reply from Mandelson re the Privy Council Oath. He admits to the oath being law and of the utmost seriousness (of course, he’d have to) BUT, he breaks it? “no foreign state”.
>
> You people really are something else!
>
>
> I just can’t wait for the IMF/SDR reply! That will be a hoot!
>
>
> Earthling
> > —–Original Message—–
> From: Earthling
> Sent: 03 February 2010 19:13
> To: LAZAROWICZ, Mark
> Cc: DARLING, Alistair ; cammy.day@edinburgh.gov.uk ; allan.jackson@edinburgh.gov.uk ; GILLAN, Angela ; DAVIES, Kate ; tellnigel@hotmail.com ; GRIFFITH, Nia ; BARRETT, John
> Subject: FW: Reply to you letter 21 January 2010
>
> Mark,
>
> I’d appreciate an answer/reply to the previous mail copied below. One, perhaps, which is a considered response from you (or perhaps even from Alistair?) rather than a desperate pass on to some “unknown” within the machinery of government who responds with a standard letter which I have just shot holes through left, right and centre.
>
> Now, I’d appreciate your response on the two most influential “scientists” in the IPCC who have been caught red handed. I would then appreciate your response to the fact that NOAA/NASA have directly contradicted the entire CO2 idea – the absolute crux of the government’s entire argument for carbon taxing. Meanwhile, keeping in mind that, with all of this shooting your belief down in flames (which is not a belief and you know it – it’s a governmental policy supporting a Corporate/Banking scam of the highest order and,as such, is criminal) – how you intend to justify your, and Ms Ruddock’s, points that such information is “highly respected” and considered by our government as “Authoritative evidence”. By the way, if you SERIOUSLY consider such evidence from such a source as NOAA/NASA, then how do you explain that you are ignoring now the fact they are telling you that CO2 has very little to do with it?
>
> So then what? Well the next question is this: What the HELL is Gordon Brown and your other idiot colleagues sending funding from a UK which is grovelling – because it has no bloody industry left and can hardly keep itself above poverty level (except in the BANKING community that is) – to overseas places like India to “help them cut carbon emissions”???????
>
> It’s a con. Yet why would the UK and USA deplete the wealth of their own nations to shore up others especially in the state we’re in? Because that money is being dictated to our government for spending outside the UK NOT by UK nationals but by “Supercapitalist” Bankers who want us in the EU and have no interest in this country or its people. Just as they now own and control Libya through the IMF Articles in 2003 (when we’re told to believe Libya are now accepted in the fold because they dumped the idea of nuke development in 2003 – good cloak – demonise your “enemy” until they accept the IMF terms) they have owned the UK for centuries and the USA since 1913.
>
> As an aside, do you know the answer to the question: What comes first? CO2 or Water vapour?
>
> Come on Mark. You’re the guy telling me you are convinced. So you tell me what you’re convinced of when your “highly respected” input is shown as fraudulent and now contradictory. Because, if you can’t support your statement and your stance/conviction, then why should I or anyone else accept it?
>
> Or might the answer to that question just be “We are Government – so YOU listen!” Would it? Is that the reality Mark? Sounds very like it from where I’m sitting mate!
>
> Get smart Mark. Because while you’re thinking of just you and your career, you’re missing the big picture mate. You’re forgetting about the people around you and the kids you have and the kids they’ll have having to live with this crap. And what are you going to say to them Mark? Daddy helped them achieve it because it helped him or because he was ignorant?
>
>
>
> Earthling
>
> From: LAZAROWICZM@parliament.uk
> To: Earthling
> Date: Sun, 7 Feb 2010 11:21:52 +0000
> Subject: RE: Reply to you letter 21 January 2010
>
> Thank you for your email. I have no reason to believe you are an idiot – as you point out, we have never met – and you are of course welcome to come to my regular Friday surgeries if you want to.
>
> However, I disagree with you – not just, it would appear, on climate change, but on most other issues as well.
>
> I do not believe the world is controlled by bankers or the Bilderberg group.
>
> I also support active participation by the UK in the EU.
>
> Regards
>
> Mark Lazarowicz MP
>
> Sent from my HTC Touch Pro
What a STUNNING rebuke of facts huh? 
>
Mark Lazarowicz believes in Global Warming….
I wonder if he has yet got the feeling he’s been duped! Unless of course he plans to make a ton of money for himself off the con like the rest of the prats out there selling fables to the masses.
Keep working on trying to stop a Carbon Tax for bicycles and farts Mark! You NUMBSKULL!
AlGORE has a new multi-Million dollar pad and you’ll never guess where it is!!! It’s been reported that the “Slammer of a house is built on a 1.5 acre lot and is equipped with a swimming pool, spa and fountains.” ”The Italian-style home has an ocean view, fountains, six fireplaces, five bedrooms and nine bathrooms.” Nine bathrooms for his nine a$$es and six fireplaces to help increase his already huge carbon footprint!?!?
All right, Albert, way to lead by example!
BUT WAIT ONE SECOND,WHY WOULD HE SPEND 8.8 MIL ON A PLACE THAT IS GOING TO BE UNDER WATER IN A FEW MONTHS OR YEARS? ACCORDING TO ALGORE, THE OCEANS WILL RISE 20 FEET AND THAT NUMBER IS LOW COMPARED TO SOME OTHER ESTIMATES.
dear-global-warming-suckers-gore-buys-8-8-million-dollar-ocean-view-villa
The Connections: Depopulation & Climate Change
Look at the names at this secret meeting.
You may well recognise the Rockefeller name. Sure Oprah Winfrey’s in there. Not exactly an “Elite” but she has a damned huge mass following in America – particularly amongst blacks – so, HOPEFULLY, you can see why she would be involved and being USED.
oprah-winfrey-joins-worlds-richest-for-secret-meeting
Now watch the following.
Bill Gates talking about our beloved Global Warming that we now even KNOW through NASA/NOAA is nothing to do with CO2 while the proponents of AGW will STILL argue it is EVEN THOUGH NASA/NOAA are promoted as major scientific advisors. You will now see what Global Warming is truly all about. A tool or tactic to control AND reduce the world’s population. NOT because we ARE running out of resources or land or that we are polluting (in terms of CO2) but because the Elite simply wish to purge billions from the planet. “The useless eaters” as they are called. ONLY “useless” because of the way these elites have set up the world financial structure and society as a whole. And notice Gates’ emphasis on vaccines.
ALSO notice that where he is supportive of a reduction in population, he’s supportive of INCREASING services. Why? Because services is business – which means profits. That is ALL this Climate Change is about. He mentions that we in the west could possibly reduce our use of services but that’s because the GREATER growing population is in Asia and some other burgeoning economies (but significantly China and India). THAT is where the redistribution of CAPITAL (not wealth) is going so they may capitalise on the growth in these areas. It is NOT rocket science.
The bottom line for these people is: Cull the human race but, for those who remain, ensure our capitalist structure capitalises fully. You are MEAT. That is all you are to these people. A source of productivity and profit. You build their world and then you pay for the privilege of doing so by buying what you produce. The Brown/Cameron issue is minor because no matter who wins it is these people who form and steer the world which impacts and controls your daily life. Brown is being attacked right now because, last year, he made a very strong speech to Congress on “his” view of the New World Order. Meanwhile the people who steer it (Bilderberg etc) are having in-fights because there are factions even within the elite. But while they ‘fight’ over tactics of this New World Order, rest assured the strategy remains.
The end goals remain.
10 comments