And you think we live in a free, democratic society!

 

“Then, of course, we come up against the justification for their action, and that is where the constitutional areas become most important. Anyone who has read any of the histories on these matters will know that the security services do not feel in any way responsible to the Government of the day. They believe they are responsible to the Crown. They represent the Crown in order to deal with subversion. I shall try to define the Crown and subversion in a moment.

Two new elements have rightly been brought into the debate by the hon. Member for Thanet, South (Mr. Aitken), which must be put upon the record. First of all, the British security services are supervised completely by the American security services. I know that because I had responsibilities for many years for those areas that were a part of what was called the “special relationship”. The Americans control our security services, supervise them, lay down the rules under which they operate, and warn them against people whom they regard as unreliable in Britain, because that is the condition upon which the United States makes nuclear weapons available to us.

The second threat—rather more shadowy but none the less real—is that, within a federal Europe, it is the intention of the Commission that security would be seen as a federal function, in part because the internal frontiers will cease to matter, and the Community will have to tackle what it defines as subversion on a federal basis.

The methods used by the security services must be set out. There is widespread vetting not only of civil servants, but, of course, of those in defence industries. The Clerk of the House and all the officials of the House are vetted by 158the security services. This was revealed in evidence submitted to the Committee of Privileges of which I am a member. That says a lot for the division between the legislature and the Executive, because the Executive vets the officials of the legislature. The BBC is vetted down to the level of anyone is involved in the preparation of current affairs or news. The research assistants of Members of Parliament are vetted. We know that from my hon. Friend the Member for Islington, North (Mr. Corbyn), who brought the matter to the House.

The security services penetrate other services and actions of our national life. I shall give three examples. Cecil King, who purported to be a newspaper proprietor or a manager, was an agent of MI5, as was Tom Driberg, a former chairman of the Labour party. Lord Rothschild, who, when I worked closely with him, I took to be an industrialist brought in to help our think tank, was actually working for MI5 throughout that period.

Massive telephone interception and the opening of letters occur. Charles II nationalised the Post Office in 1660 because he wanted to see what people were writing to one another. Therefore, the Home Secretary is carrying on a good tradition in trying to intercept postal and telephone services and to legalise it. The Home Secretary is the most appropriate person to be moving the Bill, because when I tried to make a speech in 1976 in a church in his constituency at Burford to celebrate the Levellers, he wrote to the Secretary of State for Education and Science to get the grant for the Workers’ Educational Association withdrawn. He is therefore consistent in his opposition to dissent in any century by anybody.”

 

But I guess you will think I made this up?

 

 

Don’t you?

 

Of course I did!

 

 

Would it scare you if I hadn’t?

 

 

 

Well let me tell you – I didn’t!

 

Now watch:

 

 

But don’t you worry your dumb little head now you hear? It’s all just a bunch of coincidences!

 

Oh, you wanted proof that the statement above is for real didn’t you?

home-affairs#S6CV0142P0_19881123_HOC_154

 

Happy now?

 

 

 

TONY BENN: The straight man!

It has to be said though Tony – and I am sorry – what on earth happened to your son’s integrity? Hilary doesn’t hold a candle to you!

TRY TO DEFINE THE CROWN?

While it is entirely undemocratic and answers to noone.

Tony Benn: Would have been Britain's Ron Paul (perhaps even better).

Mr Tony Benn (Chesterfield)

The debate is beginning to get to the central question, which is not the details of how we handle the security services or the official secrecy, but the constitutional relationships that are changed by the legislation that is to come before us. I believe that I am expressing an anxiety that goes far beyond the party of which I am a member about the evidence that has come to light regarding the threats to freedom by those who were supposed to defend it. Therefore, I consider that the proposals made by the Government in the Prime Minister’s speech from the Throne are far from being evidence of liberation, and offer evidence of tightening up. We should look at that first.

There is no question whatsoever—I am not seeking to blame everybody in the security services—that there have been people working in high positions in MI5 and MI6, who have used the power vested in them under the so-called well-tried mechanisms of the Maxwell Fyfe directive to undermine political democracy in Britain.

Secondly, those people have done so outside any form of ministerial control. My right hon. Friend the Member for Morley and Leeds, South (Mr. Rees) has been Home Secretary, and others in Governments of whom I have been a part have occupied that position, and I cannot believe that they knew what was going on. If they did not know what was going on, the Maxwell Fyfe directive was wholly ineffective in its operation—and I understand it is to be weakened in the new legislation.

Thirdly, when evidence of this behaviour came to light, far from the Government pursuing the law breakers for their law breaking, they pursued the man who described the law breaking for his description of it. A Government who purport to pursue a policy of law and order made no issue of the fact that in Mr. Peter Wright‘s book—after all, he was a serious and respected member of the intelligence services—he described crimes that were committed, and made no attempt to investigate those crimes or bring him to justice. His only offence was that he wrote about them.

Then, of course, we come up against the justification for their action, and that is where the constitutional areas become most important. Anyone who has read any of the histories on these matters will know that the security services do not feel in any way responsible to the Government of the day. They believe they are responsible to the Crown. They represent the Crown in order to deal with subversion. I shall try to define the Crown and subversion in a moment.

Two new elements have rightly been brought into the debate by the hon. Member for Thanet, South (Mr. Aitken), which must be put upon the record. First of all, the British security services are supervised completely by the American security services. I know that because I had responsibilities for many years for those areas that were a part of what was called the “special relationship”. The Americans control our security services, supervise them, lay down the rules under which they operate, and warn them against people whom they regard as unreliable in Britain, because that is the condition upon which the United States makes nuclear weapons available to us.

The second threat—rather more shadowy but none the less real—is that, within a federal Europe, it is the intention of the Commission that security would be seen as a federal function, in part because the internal frontiers will cease to matter, and the Community will have to tackle what it defines as subversion on a federal basis.

The methods used by the security services must be set out. There is widespread vetting not only of civil servants, but, of course, of those in defence industries. The Clerk of the House and all the officials of the House are vetted by the security services. This was revealed in evidence submitted to the Committee of Privileges of which I am a member. That says a lot for the division between the legislature and the Executive, because the Executive vets the officials of the legislature. The BBC is vetted down to the level of anyone is involved in the preparation of current affairs or news. The research assistants of Members of Parliament are vetted. We know that from my hon. Friend the Member for Islington, North (Mr. Corbyn), who brought the matter to the House.

The security services penetrate other services and actions of our national life. I shall give three examples. Cecil King, who purported to be a newspaper proprietor or a manager, was an agent of MI5, as was Tom Driberg, a former chairman of the Labour party. Lord Rothschild, who, when I worked closely with him, I took to be an industrialist brought in to help our think tank, was actually working for MI5 throughout that period.

Massive telephone interception and the opening of letters occur. Charles II nationalised the Post Office in 1660 because he wanted to see what people were writing to one another. Therefore, the Home Secretary is carrying on a good tradition in trying to intercept postal and telephone services and to legalise it. The Home Secretary is the most appropriate person to be moving the Bill, because when I tried to make a speech in 1976 in a church in his constituency at Burford to celebrate the Levellers, he wrote to the Secretary of State for Education and Science to get the grant for the Workers’ Educational Association withdrawn. He is therefore consistent in his opposition to dissent in any century by anybody.

Hon. Douglas Hurd (Witney)

rose—

Mr Tony Benn (Chesterfield)

I have the correspondence.

Hon. Douglas Hurd (Witney)

I remember inquiring 12 years ago why the taxpayers’ money was being used to help the right hon. Gentleman support the Levellers in Burford.

Mr Tony Benn (Chesterfield)

The right hon. Gentleman, with the sort of naivety that adds to his charm, confesses to the charge that I laid against him, that when he heard I was to speak at a church in Burford about the Levellers, he wrote to the Secretary of State for Education and Science to try to bring pressure to bear so as to withdraw a grant from the WEA that had invited me. He has confirmed my argument, and he is consistent. He does not believe in dissent in any century, including the present one.

The other area in which the security services have operated is in redefining subversion. There is no doubt that the phrase that became popular during the miners’ strike of “the enemy within” had been defined much earlier by the security services. The enemy within includes the trade union movement and many members of the Labour party and peace movement. That definition was undoubtedly one of the factors that led to the attempt to destroy Harold Wilson. In my opinion, it was also used, but for different reasons, to remove the former Prime Minister, the right hon. Member for Old Bexley and Sidcup (Mr. Heath), because the security services thought that he was too weak.

The methods used by the security services include the collection of damaging information and fabricating misinformation—as with the forging of Ted Short‘s bank account, which was leaked to Chapman Pincher. So much for lifelong confidentiality, when the security services regularly use certain journalists to feed out damaging information to destroy people they do not like. One cannot overlook the fact that Peter Wright confirmed Anthony Nutting‘s claim that Sir Anthony Eden ordered the assassination of another head of state, President Nasser. Anthony Nutting confirmed on television what Wright had written.

The question one must now ask is, what safeguards will there be under the new Act? Supposing Ted Short, as Lord President, had appealed to discover whether his bank account had been forged, to whom would his appeal have gone? Would it have gone to the Cabinet? No. Would it have gone to the Prime Minister? No. It would have gone to a commissioner appointed for the purpose by a previous Government.

When Bruce Kent‘s telephone was tapped, what safeguards would have existed then? If he had written to whoever it may have been and asked, “Is my phone being tapped?”, the only answer he would have received was not whether his phone was being tapped but whether the security services were abusing their rights—and those rights are covered by warrant and by a commission. The victims do not know what is being done to them, and the perpetrators do not wish to make complaints that might reveal the crimes they are perpetrating. The exceptions are one or two people such as Clive Ponting and Cathy Massiter, who were moved by their consciences, to act.

I turn to the matter of lifelong confidentiality to the Crown, which presumably should have bound Peter Wright. Who is the Crown? Did the Queen tell Peter Wright to try to destroy the Prime Minister? Obviously not. Did the Prime Minister tell Peter Wright to destroy himself? Obviously not. Did the Home Secretary tell Peter Wright to try to destroy the Government? Obviously not. The Crown is the code name we use for those central areas of Government in defence, intelligence and international relations—a state within the state—that the Government, and, I regret to say, previous Governments, did not wish to be subject to parliamentary scrutiny or discussion. The Crown is a term used to cover a concrete emplacement surrounded by barbed wire that the Home Secretary thinks needs fresh protection. It is not that he intends it to be subject to public scrutiny.

I asked the Home Secretary whether Ministers, who, after all, are Crown servants, will be covered by the new rules. It will be difficult to bind the Prime Minister to lifelong confidentiality as Bernard Ingham, on her instruction, breaches it at 11 o’clock every morning for the benefit of selected lobby correspondents who never make clear what has gone on. Are we really saying that anyone who is elected to Parliament, who becomes a Minister and discovers things he believes that it is in the public interest should be made known, will be bound to confidentiality for life? Or will anybody else? I have cited Ministers as they are uniquely accountable to those who elect them.

The reality is that there is nothing different about security. In its proper sense, security is part of the country’s defence forces, and no one denies that the country needs defence forces. But contrast the way security is treated with the other parts of the defence forces. Every year Parliament debates defence policy, but it never debates security policy—I am not talking about security operations. Parliament never discusses the definition of a subversive person—which is currently based on a phrase written years ago by a civil servant for Lord Harris in the House of Lords. We have never discussed whether as a Parliament we believe that being a member of CND makes a person subversive. That was decided by the Ministry of Defence, which told Cathy Massiter to bug Bruce Kent.

Parliament debates defence policy and votes a budget for the country’s defence establishment. It does not know the budget of the security establishment. Parliament knows the Chiefs of the Defence Staff and can ask parliamentary questions about defence matters. The issue is only confused by those who say that we cannot be told about individual security operations. Of course nobody wants to know a rumour that a bomber is coming to London. We do not want a parliamentary question that leads to the Minister responsible replying, “We think that a bomber is staying at a Bayswater hotel.” That is not the point at issue. The question is whether a state within the state, employing people with no feeling of responsibility to the Government elected by the people of this country, can continue as it is.

The Government wish to conceal information because that suits their book. I dare say that all Governments will want to conceal information—[Interruption.] It is not my purpose to make a party point. I hope that hon. Members will give me some credit. I am trying to raise a matter that is of equal concern in all parts of the House and to every elector. It would not alter matters very much if my right hon. and hon. Friends were occupying the Government Benches and those of hon. Gentlemen were seated on the Opposition Benches. I am clear about that. If hon. Gentlemen will look at the record, they will find that, as a Cabinet Minister, I raised the same questions on the Labour party’s national executive and submitted a memorandum that warned of the dangers. That was 10 years ago.

When one considers that the Government sent in the police to remove the Zircon film, and the prosecutions of Tisdall and Ponting, one realises that the real conflict concerns both sides of the House and those who elect us. We have heard much about the oxygen of publicity for Sinn Fein. Democracy lives by the oxygen of information. If one cuts off the oxygen of information and releases instead the poisonous gas of secrecy, misinformation and news management, one destroys the basis on which this House safeguards our people. The House of Commons is the real guarantor of the liberties of the people, not those individuals in little offices who have their own ideas about who is subversive and who engage in bugging, blackmailing and in destroying the reputations of those whom they do not like.

Democracy’s second safeguard is conscience. There is no substitute in law, administrative action or court ruling for the person, be they man or woman, who says, “What is being done is wrong and I shall speak my mind and take the consequences.” If one removes the safeguard of conscience from people who, in the course of their work, may come across something they feel it would be in the public interest to divulge—whether one gaols them, punishes them, or makes them into public villains—they would only be doing what we told the Germans at the Nuremberg trials they should have done, which was to disregard unjust orders—[HON. MEMBERS: "No!"] Of course that is what the Nuremberg trials were all about.

Parliament must protect these principles. In many ways I share the view of the hon. Member for Thanet, South. Next week I shall have been here 38 years. I have never known a House of Commons that has been so craven in surrendering one of its rights after another—surrendering powers to the EEC, accepting 120 foreign bases, and now, in the name of security, handing over even greater powers to the Executive. If we do not stand up here and now it will be too late—

Mr Robert Rhodes James (Cambridge)

Will the right hon. Gentleman give way?

Mr Tony Benn (Chesterfield)

I am approaching my last sentence.

We must make a stand here and now or we shall find that, in the name of freedom, we are surrendering our liberties.

WHO THE HELL ARE THESE PEOPLE? WHAT THE HELL ARE THEY? AND WHY ARE THEY IMMUNE TO LAW? 

BECAUSE ROTHSCHILD’S A JEW? AND THEREFORE, BRINGING CHARGES WOULD BE DEEMED ANTI-SEMITIC?

 

Mr Graham Allen (Nottingham North)

To ask the Attorney-General whether he is considering bringing any prosecutions under the Official Secrets Act arising from the “Spycatcher” episode.

Sir Patrick Mayhew (Tunbridge Wells)

No, Sir.

 

Mr Graham Allen (Nottingham North)

Will the right hon. and learned Gentleman tell us why he is not yet prosecuting Lord Rothschild?

 

Sir Patrick Mayhew (Tunbridge Wells)

My answer as to why no prosecution was being brought was given several months ago. To bring such a prosecution would not have been in conformity with the Attorney-General‘s published guidelines for prosecutors.

 

Mr Michael Fallon (Darlington)

Does my right hon. and learned Friend find it extraordinary that, even after yesterday’s outrage, the Opposition still do not support the need to uphold the duty of confidentiality of those who work in our security service in order to defend the country from terrorism and subversion?

 

Sir Patrick Mayhew (Tunbridge Wells)

I very much agree with what my hon. Friend has said. There seems to be a certain ambivalence in the attitude of Opposition Members to that litigation. I venture to suggest that if we were not prepared to incur the cost of litigation to uphold the duty to which my hon. Friend has referred, the cost would very soon be more than money.

TRY TO DEFINE THE CROWN?

SO WHO THE HELL IS IT THAT ARE PROSECUTING US?

AN UNKNOWN, CENTRAL STATE WITHIN A STATE, SUBJECT TO NO-ONE AND SUBJECT TO NO PARLIAMENTARY SCRUTINY?

AND THE CROWN PROSECUTION SERVICE WANTS TO DO WHAT? PROSECUTE WHO? FOR WHAT?

WHO IS PROSECUTING US?

As for this piece of absolute trash:

Sir John Morris (Aberavon)

I, too, wholeheartedly welcome the Attorney-General back to his place in the House.

What is the prime consideration in relation to prosecutions? Is it damage to national security, or is it political embarrassment? Does the Attorney-General maintain consistency in his approach to Miss Tisdall and Mr. Ponting and to others such as Mr. West, Mr. Pincher, Lord Rothschild and the security men who may have leaked information to those people? Has not section 2 of the Official Secrets Act been virtually put out to grass and replaced in practical terms as a damage limitation exercise by actions for breach of confidentiality?

Mr Michael Havers (Wimbledon)

I thank the right hon. and learned Gentleman for his kind remarks. He used the word prosecutions, not for the first time during my questions. In fact, the proceedings in Australia are civil proceedings. There is no way in which we can prosecute under the Official Secrets Act in another country. With regard to the action in Australia, the principle has been brought out clearly today that it is the Government’s determination to establish that once a man joins a service in which he promises to keep secret for the rest of his life all that he finds, that principle should be upheld.

 

So you cannot prosecute in another Commonwealth country where the Queen is the Head of State? Her Majesty had her Governor General destroy the Government of Gough Whitlam in 1975!

So Her Majesty can do that but Her Majesty cannot prosecute in Australia, an individual who has broken the law relating to her Section 2 of the Official Secrets Act? Didn’t we just say it is the CROWN PROSECUTION SERVICE?

Then if the CROWN can’t prosecute certain people then what sort of CROWN is this?

I’ll tell you what sort of CROWN it is: It is a CROWN, within which ROTHSCHILD plays a very significant part alongside his lackey Lizzie!

WHO IS MICHAEL SCHEUER?

Hot on the heels of my last blogpost “Israel: The contrarian agenda” comes this. Michael Scheuer – the ex CIA man who is throwing his word around the world on media and at International book festivals as if he is some “guru” of the Intelligence world – which, being ex CIA, I guess he has the right to think so.

However, I have some issues with this rather “mild mannered”, bearded, anti Israel, ex head of Bin Laden section of the CIA.

1. Scheuer became a public figure after being outed as the anonymous author of the 2004 book Imperial Hubris, in which he criticized many of the United States’ assumptions about Islamist insurgencies and particularly Osama bin Laden. He depicts bin Laden as a rational actor who is fighting to weaken the United States by weakening its economy, rather than merely combating and killing Americans. He challenges the common assumption that terrorism is the threat that the United States is facing in the modern era, arguing rather that Islamist insurgency (and not “terrorism”) is the core of the conflict between the U.S. and Islamist forces, who in places such as Kashmir, Xinjiang, and Chechnya are “struggling not just for independence but against institutionalized barbarism.” Osama bin Laden acknowledged the book in a 2007 statement, suggesting that it revealed “the reasons for your losing the war against us”. According to bin Laden, “If you want to understand what’s going on and if you would like to get to know some of the reasons for your losing the war against us, then read the book of Michael Scheuer in this regard.” Perhaps because Michael Scheuer and the CIA wrote Bin Laden’s biographical and ideological details? 

So the very man himself, Bin Laden, praises Scheuer’s work while Scheuer served as the Chief of the Bin Laden Issue Station (aka “Alec Station”), from 1996 to 1999, the Osama bin Laden tracking unit at the Counterterrorist Center. He then worked again as Special Advisor to the Chief of the bin Laden unit from September 2001 to November 2004. Scheuer then, seems to know Bin Laden inside-out OR just COULD it be that the Bin Laden fable was written by Michael Scheuer and his CIA cronies? Remember that George H. W. Bush has been a major figure in the CIA from the 1960s to the present day and that the CIA is the intelligence arm of “Rockefeller Inc”.

[Rockefeller also reportedly has connections to Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). As well as knowing Allen Dulles and his brother John Foster Dulles — who was an in-law of the family  since his college years, it was in Rockefeller Center that Allen Dulles had set up his WWII operational center after Pearl Harbor, liaising closely with MI6 which also had their principal U.S. operation in the Center. He also knew and associated with the former CIA director Richard Helms, as well as Archibald Roosevelt, Jr., a Chase Bank employee and former CIA agent, whose cousin was the CIA agent, Kermit Roosevelt, Jr., involved in the Iran coup of 1953. Also, in 1953, he had befriended William Bundy, a pivotal CIA analyst for nine years in the 1950s, who became the Agency liaison to the National Security Council, and a subsequent lifelong friend. Moreover, in Cary Reich's biography of his brother Nelson, a former CIA agent states that David was extensively briefed on covert intelligence operations by himself and other Agency division chiefs, under the direction of David's "friend and confidant", CIA Director Allen Dulles.]

Michael Scheuer: The man who helped create "Bin Laden"

2. Michael Scheuer is a jesuit

Scheuer was born in Buffalo and graduated from Canisius College in 1974, and went on to earn an M.A. from Niagara University in 1976 and another M.A. from Carleton University in 1982. He also received a Ph.D. in British Empire-U.S.-Canada-U.K. relations from the University of Manitoba in 1986.

Canisius College is a private Roman Catholic college in Buffalo, New York, United States. The college was founded in 1870 by members of the Society of Jesus (Jesuits) from Germany and is named after St. Peter Canisius. The college is one of 28 institutions in the Association of Jesuit Colleges and Universities. It is distinct from Canisius-Kolleg, an elite Berlin high school also run by the Jesuits.

Niagara University is a Catholic university in the Vincentian tradition, located in the Town of Lewiston in Niagara County, New York. Originally founded by the Congregation of the Mission in 1856 as Our Lady of Angels Seminary, it became Niagara University in 1883. The University is still run by the Vincentian Fathers. All of Niagara’s 25 presidents, including its current president, Father Joseph L. Levesque, C.M., have been Vincentian priests.

Carleton University In 1967, the Catholic school Saint Patrick’s College was incorporated into Carleton. Founded in 1942, it had been granting its diplomas via the University of Ottawa. Both University of Ottawa and Saint Patrick’s had been inaugurated by the Catholic order Oblates of Immaculate Mary (OMI).

University of Manitoba Also linked to catholic ideology within its colleges. As of 2010, there have been 96 Rhodes Scholars from the University of Manitoba, more than from any other university in Western Canada.

Known as the “world’s oldest and most prestigious international graduate scholarship”, the Rhodes Scholarships are administered and awarded by the Rhodes Trust, which was established in 1902 under the terms and conditions of the will of Cecil John Rhodes, and funded by his estate under the administration of Nathan Rothschild. Scholarships have been awarded to applicants annually since 1902 on the basis of academic achievement and strength of character.

He also makes radio and television appearances and teaches a graduate-level course on Al-Qaeda at Georgetown University. Georgetown is the “belly of the beast” jesuit university in Washington D.C.

He also participates in conferences on terrorism and national security issues, such as the New America Foundation’s December 2004 conference, “Al Qaeda 2.0: Transnational Terrorism After 9/11.”

I wonder who funds the New America Foundation? Well, would you believe it, there’s that same name at the top of list which is top of the list of so many other questionable organisations. The Rocks get everywhere don’t they?

$1,000,000+ The Ford Foundation, The New York Community Trust, The Rockefeller Foundation

funding

Now, the CIA was born out of the OSS and the connections with jesuitism are strong while one must then consider the following:

“It can easily be seen that the identity of Jesuit political thought with the objectives of Nazi-Fascism makes it imperative to conceal it from the American public. Were it otherwise, the Catholic Church would suffer complete loss of its prestige in the United States — in the eyes of Catholics and non-Catholics alike.” {8} Leo H. Lehmann, 1942 Irish Ex-Priest Behind the Dictators

The Fourteenth Amendment so altered the Constitution to the point that it created “the new republican constitution” spoken of in The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion. The Jesuit Order, behind the new constitution, created the American Empire. In 1868, on the ruins of George Washington’s Calvinistic Republic, the Jesuits’ new “Holy Roman Empire of the West” was set up with its massive central government in Washington. Its national purpose would be to restore the Temporal Power of the Jesuits’ “infallible” Pope over every nation.

To do this the Empire was made the financial and military colossus of the world using J. P. Morgan, their Federal Reserve Bank and the Great Depression. In subduing the nations, credit created out of nothing would be used to build tremendous war machines for the “extirpation of heretics and liberals.” This same Jesuit credit, called “foreign aid,” would be used to establish and finance the reign of dictators loyal to Rome over every nation, including the Zionist and Talmudic government of Israel.

The economic policy of the Empire would be the destruction of small, independent, free enterprise businessmen and the consolidation of capital into the hands of Rome’s corporate monopolies (corporate fascism), while the people would be submitted to the ten pillars of The Communist Manifesto in exchange for The Ten Commandments. A central bank, from which comes all credit, along with a fiat, bogus currency, would replace state banks having distributed federally minted gold and silver coins. A heavy and progressive income tax would invade the privacy of the people while replacing the apportioned tax.

The wicked Social Security numbering system would keep track of all “taxpayers.” In fact, it would be the Vatican’s world government number by which the Society of Jesus, through its FBI and CIA, would track every citizen of the Empire. These two pillars alone would be enough to destroy the prosperous White Celtic-Anglo-Saxon Protestant Middle Class, while creating the feudal system of the Dark Ages composed only of the noble super-rich Catholic Whites and the common super-poor of all races and religions.

The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion say it clearly in Protocol number twenty:

“The concentration of industry in the hands of [cartel] capitalists out of the hands of small masters has drained away all the juices of the peoples and with them also the states . . .” {9}

Dear truth-seeker, do you see how the radical mass emancipation of the Negro slaves after the War Between the States was never intended to benefit them but rather was calculated to destroy the private wealth of small White “heretic” masters in the South? Historically speaking, Blacks generally only produce wealth when trained and/or overseen by Whites. Do you see how the Fourteenth Amendment enslaved both Whites and Blacks to the new master in Washington — the Society of Jesus? Is not the Archbishop of New York the real “massa” of Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, Albert Gore and Jesse Jackson (who is apparently to be replaced with another mulatto Black agitator, Al Sharpton), they being nothing more than his “altar boys”?

With the economic system of Communism in place, the political system of the Empire would be an absolutist military dictatorship of the president as “Commander-in-Chief,” for the purpose of “national security.” Protocol number ten spoke of this:

“We shall invest the president with the right of declaring a state of war. We shall justify this last right on the ground that the president as chief of the whole army of the country must have it at his disposal in case of need for the defense of the new republican constitution . . .” {10}

That is fascism, pure and simple. The absolute Commander-in-Chief is one with the Jesuits’ corporate monopolies run by the Knights of Malta. Remembering the words of the Jesuits as quoted by Pierre van Paassen,

“Fascism is the regime that corresponds most closely to the concepts of the Church of Rome.” {11}

It was fascism that terribly persecuted the Protestants of Franco’s Spain and Mussolini’s Italy. Additionally, it was fascism that deported Jews to Hitler’s death camps in Poland. In fact both Hitler and Stalin, the Grand Inquisitors, were Roman Catholic fascists. Nazism and Communism were simply smokescreens describing socialist economic systems. Both dictators were loyal to Rome’s Jesuits who put them in power, as they both murdered millions of Protestants, Orthodox and Jewish “heretics and liberals,” including many “liberal” Catholic priests and people.

Dear truth-seeker, this is the coming scenario for the Protestants and Jews of the American Empire. The President, since the Emergency War Powers Act of 1950, has been a fascist military dictator loyal to his Jesuit masters at Georgetown University. And with the passage of King George Bush II’s new Terrorist Act, fascism will further increase. The Jesuits will continue to advance their international “Negro/Muslim Agitation” (directed against historically White Protestant nations) and incite international anti-Semitism, or more correctly, anti-Jewish fury.

Much was ignited in the American Empire with the Israeli attack on the American spy ship “USS Liberty,” along with the conviction of the Israeli spy, Jonathan Pollard. The Jesuits’ International Intelligence Community including the Mossad created both incidents. Anti-Jewish fury among both Whites and Blacks must be used to drive American Jews back to Israel for the purpose of attempting to kill them all there!

The means by which the Sons of Loyola will accomplish this is their National Security Agency — the NSA. We read:

“Its nickname is the ‘Jew Room’. Inside the National Security Agency is an intelligence center from which all American Jews are banned, regardless of their proven loyalty or devotion to country, just as the U.S. Navy bannedJews from electronic surveillance ships, such as the USS Liberty . . . it is, and has been, the heart of the secret war against the Jews.” {12}

Remembering the words of Loyola in his Secret Instructions of the Jesuits, “ . . . our members will work themselves into the favor of persons in the highest part of government and consequently be admitted into their most secret councils,” {13} is it not obvious the Jesuit Order rules “The Jew Room”?

For in the words of ex-Jesuit E. Boyd Barrett:

“In the Order hatred of the Jews is traditional . . . it is forbidden to admit any one of Jewish descent into the Order [from 1593 to the repeal of the statute in 1946, thereby escaping Holocaust war guilt]. Japanese, Chinese, Indians and Negroes may be admitted into the Society of Jesus, but never, under any circumstances, a Jew [except Albert and Auguste Valenstein, who were permitted to enter the Order in the early 1900s for the purpose of working with the Jesuit General’s early Masonic Jewish Zionists including Theodor Herzl and later, Jerzy Kluger, boyhood friend of Pope John Paul II]!” {14}

For Ignatius set the example:

“He [Loyola, the heartless beast] also obtained great honour from all classes for his zeal for the conversion of the Jews. His method was not original. He obtained a decree from the Pope Paul III, then reigning, that the Jews should not be allowed the services of a physician, no matter how serious might be their danger, unless they first accepted the ministrations of a priest . . . ” {15}

The Jesuits will also continue to foster international anti-Americanism depicting the Empire as “the Great Satan” to the Arab world and the “NATO Nazi mass bombing bully” to the rest of the world. The NATO crusades in Iraq and Yugoslavia have increased the nations’ hatred for us Americans, they not knowing that the Jesuit-CFR-controlled American government is also the enemy of the American people. Meanwhile, the Jesuits have furthered their quest to reduce the world to the universal rule of their “infallible” Papal Caesar in Jerusalem.

esp_vatican21.htm

Michael Scheuer is playing along with the globalist faction (tied to the jesuit/papal “army”) to bring about a change of American and western “goodwill” toward Israel and create the image of the dangerous “Mad dog” (which Israel do quite well themselves anyhow) in order to then justify bringing down the Israeli regime. The Bin Laden unit, in my opinion, was set up to write the entire fable of Bin Laden and Al Qaeda and Michael Scheuer played exactly that role. Bin Laden, a construct of the CIA as is Al Qaeda. Scheuer and friends creating the “biography” and the higher “Papal Knights” along with their little attack dogs Israel and Mossad etc setting up the conditions for 9/11 just as PNAC and Brzezinski suggested was required to ensure the American public would acquiesce and give up their liberty and freedom at home while supporting the “American Imperialism” (Globalist Imperialism using American blood) overseas.

All clear as day.

ISRAEL IS DOOMED AND THE JESUITS ARE BEHIND IT. Michael is just playing his part to make scheuer!

As a countryman of mine pointed out at the Edinburgh book festival Michael: You’re full of shit! 9 parts truth and 1 part Jesuit agenda.

 

Israel: The Contrarian Agenda

The following totally scrambles the existing thinking in both mainstream AND alternative media as I see it. I have not read or seen anything which suggests what you are about to read. Therefore, I take all responsibility – right or wrong – for the following analysis.

Lord Jacob "Israel" Rothschild

The Globalist agenda is a very immense one and while I have attacked and criticised Zionism (ad nauseum) over a period of time, I’ll also be the first to state that it is Israel which the globalists now wish to destroy in one way or another. While most of you will consider Zionism = Globalism in many ways, it is and it is not.

Zionism is a tool of the globalists. Nothing more, nothing less. Zionism is a political ideology and movement which is built upon a false association with judaism. It purports to be the ultimate wish and ideology of there being a jewish homeland and that that is its aim. It is NOT its aim.

So Zionism is a tool just as capitalism, fabianism, Nazism, comunism and fascism are tools. As you well know, each of these “isms” are constructed and then, at the right time, destroyed by the globalists. The globalist money builds them and the same money destroys them.

Now remember: Israel and Zionism are Rothschild constructs – entirely. Rothschild is head zionist and head globalist. What comes first for the Rothschilds?

Answer: The Rothschilds!

The Rothschilds bought the Suez canal for the British government in the 1800s (or you could put it this way: The British government bought the Suez canal and was loaned the money for it BY the Rothschilds). In effect and as is historical fact, the Rothschilds then controlled both the Suez AND the British government. Very little has changed since.

Benjamin D’Israeli was British PM at the time and when he died, who then was trustee of D’Israeli’s will and testament? Answer: Lord Rothschild. But that’s by the by.

During the 1800s and early 1900s, the globalists (headed by Rothschild) did not have an adequate grasp on the middle east and its riches, its resources, land etc. However, by 1948, the Rothschilds had finally achieved the promise of a “land for the jews” called Israel which the British government, via the Balfour Declaration (which the government had never intended, it would seem, to be a remit to create a jewish only state but simply to be a concession to Rothschild that his “beloved jews” (not at all actually the true interest of the Rothschilds but a very useful tool nevertheless) would SHARE the state (a British mandate) with the Palestinian people. Well, times move on as do the machinations of the globalists like Rothschild so that we now have this “Mad dog” state (their own words by Moshe Dyan) called Israel.

Why did Rothschild and the globalists (helped by a Zionist organisation, some of whom may well have believed that Rothschild’s plan was to have a safe haven for jews) want an “Israel” in the Middle East? Because they then had a “beach-head” from which to attack the region they had otherwise failed to bring under their control.

So, the establishment of Israel (by way of terrorist acts against the very government who handed them their “safe haven” in the desert) provided a means to an end and a first step for the domination of the region. How was such domination achieved?

Easily.

This “race” which we shall refer to as “jews” but who never originated from this land and neither was this land ever called “Israel” but was, in part, Canaan, at the time of Jesus and before – the Israelites were simply one of many tribes in the region and Israel himself (the Tribe OF Israel) was a man called Jacob (so the story goes) – have been persecuted over centuries by so many different races, creeds, cultures and nationalities (the question is why? Let’s be blunt, if you are sacked from a great number of jobs, the likelihood is that the problem lies with you right? think about it) that, to have the “race” in the centre of the Middle East (entirely Muslim) is like throwing a single christian into a den of Lions. Perhaps a poor analogy however, because one would always support the christian since he is both the underdog and it suggests the muslim world of Arabs are like a pack of animals – but then that is precisely what Rothschild would capitalise on. That ideology.

The name Israel has historically been used, in common and religious usage, to refer to the biblical Kingdom of Israel or the entire Jewish nation.^[30] According to the Hebrew Bible the name “Israel” was given to the patriarch Jacob (Standard Yisraʾel, Isrāʾīl; Septuagint Greek: Ἰσραήλ; “struggle with God”^[31]) after he successfully wrestled with an angel of God.^[32] Jacob’s twelve sons became the ancestors of the Israelites, also known as the Twelve Tribes of Israel or Children of Israel. Jacob and his sons had lived in Canaan but were forced by famine to go into Egypt for four generations until Moses, a great-great grandson of Jacob,^[33] led the Israelites back into Canaan in the “Exodus“. The earliest archaeological artifact to mention the word “Israel” is the Merneptah Stele of ancient Egypt (dated to the late 13th century BCE).^[34]

The area is also known as the Holy Land, being holy for all Abrahamic religions including Judaism, Christianity, Islam and the Bahá’í Faith. Prior to the 1948 Israeli Declaration of Independence, the whole region was known by various other names including Southern Syria, Syria Palestina, Kingdom of Jerusalem, Iudaea Province, Coele-Syria, Retjenu, Canaan and, particularly, Palestine.

Now, what happens when you have what is promoted as a judeo-christian nation which is purportedly the “only democratic nation in the region” (translation: the only fully controlled and owned globalist state in the region) while that state actually takes an aggressive stance toward its neighbours from day one while bleating that “if we don’t stand up for ourselves the Arab/Muslims will slaughter us”. Yet, had they shared Palestine with the Palestinians and lived in peace (and as we know, terrorism of the King David Hotel and other atrocities around that time is not the way to settle peacefully with one’s neighbours AND hosts), there would have been no wish on the part of their neighbours – the muslim world – to feel this way. Again, we must ask ourselves who is at fault here when jews or “jews” have been thrown out of almost every nation they have used as a host in history (while isn’t that a fact? They have had HOST nations a little like, one could say, the movie “Alien” where the human body acted as a HOST for the Alien embryo). How does one destroy a nation or a culture or movement? By planting “aliens” with agendas into the nation. By setting up oneself within a host and eating away from the inside. If you have different hosts in different lands and you wish to destroy them all then one good way would be by setting up a “diaspora” now wouldn’t it?

Diaspora definition: any group migration or flight from a country or region. Synonyms: dispersion, dissemination, migration, displacement, scattering.

Interestingly: “Spore” definition: A usually one-celled reproductive body that can grow into a new organism without uniting with another cell. Spores are haploid (having only a single set of chromosomes). Fungi, algae, seedless plants, and certain protozoans reproduce asexually by spores.

Now, remember, I am not speaking here of an everyday, ignorant jew – ignorant of the agenda of a zionist movement which is wholly controlled by globalist interests and who have NO interest, nor similarity, to an everyday jew (just like the everyday, ignorant Brit or American who have zero in common with the British or American wealth establishment and who are globalists themselves or pawns thereof). So PLEASE understand this and do not be so willfully ignorant as to, once again, read this quickly, pick up what you want from it and scream “anti semite”. Or, by all means do so – I couldn’t give a rats arse if you are willfully ignorant!

So then Rothschild and the globalists have their “beach-head”, Israel, within the Islamic region of the world and they use the tool of “persecution throughout the ages” and the tool of “the Holocaust” (nothing to do with Arabs by the way) and “democracy” and all that good stuff to create the myth of “poor little Israel” while “poor little Israel” has nuclear weapons which have never been admitted to the UN security council while that same body – controlled by the same globalists, Rockefeller this time – demands every other country in the region and elsewhere to declare their nuclear weapons and/or refrain from developing them – the hypocrisy is absolutely stunning isn’t it?). Therefore, every move Israel makes is one of defence even when it is the agressor. The western mainstream media owned by the globalists ensures that the ignorant mass of conditioned western population, swallow the story they’re given while Israel is acting precisely as the globalists want – to shake up the region.

Over time – after the 2nd world war – the globalists further consolidate their position in the Middle East by way of their technology and capability in finding and then drilling for oil via their oil and gas multinationals. The IMF does its bit to leverage entry for western conglomerates (globalist interests) into the region using bribery and outright corruption to increase the region’s debt but the region is still under the ultimate control of non western orientated leaders and establishment.

Then comes 9/11.

Netanyahu: “Good for Israel”. No buddy, you may have thought so at the time (but I doubt it because I’m sure you know the globalist plan) but you’re going to find out that it was the worst thing for the PEOPLE of Israel even though you, as a state, played a formidable part in it.

You see, while your Zionist neocons like Wolfowitz, Perle, Donald Rumsfeld etc wrote your PNAC document wherein you state:

“[What we require is] a military that is strong and ready to meet both present and future challenges; a foreign policy that boldly and purposefully promotes American principles abroad; and national leadership that accepts the United States’ global responsibilities. Of course, the United States must be prudent in how it exercises its power. But we cannot safely avoid the responsibilities of global leadership of the costs that are associated with its exercise. America has a vital role in maintaining peace and security in Europe, Asia, and the Middle East. If we shirk our responsibilities, we invite challenges to our fundamental interests. The history of the 20th century should have taught us that it is important to shape circumstances before crises emerge, and to meet threats before they become dire. The history of the past century should have taught us to embrace the cause of American leadership.”

and

 ”Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event––like a new Pearl Harbor”

[ And please note that the "What we require" and references to the "United States" are all actually translatable to "We" and "United States" being "Globalist interests" and nothing to do with the United States people at all - the US (and UK/NATO) military is ALL globalist controlled]

And you THINK that is beneficial to jewish/Israeli interests, you are terribly wrong.

So while Ehud Barak and Richard Perle are shouting for the Western nations (Christians doing the dirty work of the “jews”/Zionists once more) to attack a long list of nations in the Middle East on the very day of 9/11 on British TV (funnily enough all those same nations we are picking off one by one up to the present day)…..

Watch and listen from 7.20 onwards:

…. the culmination of all of this leads to a VERY different outcome for Israel which has not yet (but will) revealed itself.

When the magician does his magic trick through slight of hand, you are watching his left hand while his right is doing the REAL job!

Let me explain:

Israel refuses to tell US its Iran intentions

Israel has refused to reassure President Barack Obama that it would warn him in advance of any pre-emptive strike on Iran’s nuclear capabilities, raising fears that it may be planning a go-it-alone attack as early as next summer. (that is Summer 2012)

The US leader was rebuffed last month when he demanded private guarantees that   no strike would go ahead without White House notification, suggesting Israelno longer plans to “seek Washington’s permission”, sources said. The disclosure, made by insiders briefed on a top-secret meeting between America’s most senior defence chief and Benjamin Netanyahu, Israel’s hawkish prime minister, comes amid concerns that Iran’s continuing progress towards nuclear weapons capability means the Jewish state has all but lost hope for a diplomatic solution.

On Tuesday, UN weapons inspectors released their most damning report to date   into Iran’s nuclear activities,   saying for the first time that the Islamic republic appeared to be building   a nuclear weapon. It was with that grave possiblity in mind that Leon Panetta, the US defence secretary, flew into Israel last month on what was ostensibly a routine trip.

Officially, his brief was restricted to the Middle East peace process, but the most important part of his mission was a private meeting with Mr Netanyahu and the defence minister, Ehud Barak. Once all but a handful of trusted staff had left the room, Mr Panetta conveyed an urgent message from Barack Obama. The president, Mr Panetta said, wanted an unshakable guarantee that Israel would not carry out a unilateral military strike against Iran’s nuclear installations without first seeking Washington’s clearance.

The two Israelis were notably evasive in their response, according to sources both in Israel and the United States.

“They did not suggest that military action was being planned or was imminent, but neither did they give any assurances that Israel would first seek Washington’s permission, or even inform the White House in advance that a mission was underway,” one said.

An Israeli attack could probably manage at most a dozen targets, using more than 100 F-15 and F-16 aircraft.

But not everyone is so sure. Mr Obama’s willingness to take on Iran militarily is openly questioned in Israel. And while many Israelis do not believe Iran has any intention of actually firing a nuclear missile at them, the the key question is whether their prime minister is one of them.

In Mr Netanyahu’s eyes, Iran’s president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, is another “Hitler” whose aim is to complete what the Holocaust failed to do by wiping out the Jewish race.

“People outside Israel don’t understand how profound memories of the Holocaust are, and how they affect future policy making,” said Mr Bergman, the military analyst. “At the end of the day, this policy of  ‘never again’ would dictate Israel’s behaviour when intelligence comes through that Iran has come close to a bomb.”

Israel-refuses-to-tell-US-its-Iran-intentions.html

Now, let us, at this point, correct the proven mistranslation of Ahmadinejad’s words regarding “Wiping Israel off the map”. He did not ever say this. He stated that the Zionist regime (NOT Israel or the Israeli people) should disappear from the pages of history. ENTIRELY different words and intent from that which the Israeli, American and British mainstream media and press would have us all believe – but then it is the globalists who own them so it is what we have come to expect from our media whores.

Further, Israelis have every right to believe that Iran would not attack them. For what reason would Iran wish to attack? Let’s forget this old worn out “tactic” of “Because they hate us for our freedoms” – WHAT freedoms? Who feels free in ANY country these days under this Orwellian nightmare called Globalism? The Israelis themselves, I am sure, just like us Brits or Americans hardly feel “free”. We are not! We are controlled by a UN based upon a legal system oppressing us through our registration of birth (but that’s the subject of another blog you can read).

Israel themselves have nukes! Do the countries of the Middle East and their people live in constant fear that Israel would nuke them? (let’s ignore for a moment the fact that, with zionist hawks like Netanyahu at the helm, they probably would). Do the nations of the world all live in constant fear that the US or UK or any of the other nations with nukes are going to nuke them tomorrow or any day soon? Then WHY does the Israeli regime think Iran would? (even IF Iran were developing nukes which has, as yet never been proven while Iran says it is for nuclear energy). Is it that “persecution complex” which follows them everywhere at large again? Well by the sound of the above – “People outside Israel don’t understand how profound memories of the Holocaust are, and how they affect future policy making,”  – it probably is!

Imagine a PARANOID, rabid dog (or “Mad dog”) with nuclear weapons! Now THAT scares the hell out of me more than Mahmoud Achmadinejad!

So, what we have here is an Israeli regime suggesting they may well make a pre-emptive strike upon Iran in or around Summer 2012. Would that be to the globalists’ liking? I say yes. Very definitely so. Yet, from reading the above article and others, it would seem it is not to Obama’s liking now wouldn’t it? And yet we know that Obama is a globalist puppet so that doesn’t make sense does it?

Herr Rockefeller

Well yes it does. Because while the world believes that the US and UK etc are big Israeli buddies (and I have suggested this myself on the face of it in blogs and videos while I also recognise the bigger “game” in all of this), they are not. They are “buddies” (more like paid servants) of the Rothschild and Rockefeller globalists. Yes Rothschild owns/controls Israel BUT he sees it as simply another pawn in the game. Rothschild doesn’t give a damn about people whoever they are whatever nationality, religion or race. Rothschild doesn’t give a damn about the ideology of an Israeli state for Jews except it has been of great use up until now. NOW, however, it is past its “sell by” date. It’s usefulness as a regime in the middle east has come to a stop.

Why? Well, because, since 9/11 what has happened? The globalists have now directly taken up real estate in the region. They have Iraq and they now have Libya and, of course, Afghanistan. The globalists now control Israel and three other far more sizeable nations in the region. Israel is actually no longer needed AND, in fact, is somewhat of a problem for them because what the globalist plan is, is the total unification of the Arab muslim world under Islam with all states having the globalist (“western”) puppet regimes. However, the muslim nations/people do not want this “Mad dog” jewish nation biting at their heels and they wish to feel they are in charge of their own destiny. The Arab League and the Muslim Brotherhood (entirely globalist controlled) will have them believe they have achieved it while, quietly, the puppets will be singing the globalist tune (it was NEVER the western tune because the globalists are not interested in the ideas of east and west but simply globalism and one world government – the world is seen as their oyster NOT a country or region).

So HERE is the crux of the matter:

If and when Israel decide to make a pre-emptive strike on Iran (or perhaps another nation) – and Netanyahu is very probably well in step with the globalist aspirations to the point he and his cronies would be happy to sacrifice Israel for the agenda – the US globalist controlled Armed Forces (perhaps along with the UK and EU and NATO) would crush Israel.

I mentioned the Wolfowitz’s and Perles earlier. These nerds are lackeys in the scheme of things. They are useful idiots. Perhaps they actually believe they are having the western nations carry out Israel’s dirty work for Israel’s benefit or perhaps they ARE smarter than that, I don’t know. What I am 99% convinced of however is that while these guys strategise, there is a level above them who strategise on the “Grand Chessboard”. These individuals are the Kissingers and the Brzezinskis.

Now why does Obama seem reticient to attack Iran while also trying to be diplomatic and friendly with Israel? In fact, one would consider him to be very friendly with Israel since he is funded by Goldman Sachs and Rothschild picked etc. But Goldman and Rothschild are NOT concerned with Israel but with globalism. THEIR “Zionism” is not the zionism of the many jews who have bought into the story and ideology of a “homeland for the jews”. The Zionists allowed and consciously wished for the deaths and persecutions of the jews in WW2 and they got it. They wanted it because they wanted sufficient jewish blood to be spilled to give them a strong case to create the jewish homeland in Israel. But it was NEVER for the purpose of having a jewish homeland. It was for the purpose of having that globalist “beach-head” in the region to agitate while the globalists made their further plans.

Why did the Zionist organisation smuggle Nazis into Palestine near the end of the war? Smuggling Nazis into the homeland for the jews? Come on! Use your head!

YES THEY DID!

Zionist Organisation smuggling Nazis into Palestine

So, as said earlier, high above the Wolfowitz and Perle neocons are the Kissingers and Brzezinskis. Now, Brzezinski wrote his book “The Grand Chessboard” in 1997 – 3 years before the neocons wrote their PNAC document suggesting a new Pearl Harbor would be useful to drum up Americans support for imperial wars by the American military (on behalf of the globalists who Brzezinski works for) and this is what HE said in it:

“…it may find it more difficult to fashion a consensus on foreign policy issues, except in the circumstances of a truly massive and widely perceived direct external threat.”

Now let’s put the PNAC and Brzezinski quotes side by side:

“…the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor” PNAC

“…it may find it more difficult to fashion a consensus on foreign policy issues, except in the circumstances of a truly massive and widely perceived direct external threat.” BRZEZINSKI

Zbigniew isn't a jew yeah yeah yeah he's a metal guru!

Now, by all means, look up the source document and book for each of these quotes and read in full context. You will see it changes nothing. Both of these groups/people knew what had to be done and they did it. If you wish to believe in coincidences like this then you might like a book I would recommend: Fables and Fairy stories by Hans Christian Andersen! Be careful though. It contains adult content suitable only for those 8 years and older!

But where is your evidence Earthling regarding the idea that the globalists (via the American/UK/NATO forces) would consider taking out Israel?

Here:  zbig-brzezinski-obama-administration-should-tell-israel-us-will-attack-israeli-jets-if-they-try-to-a

The national security adviser for former President Jimmy Carter, Zbigniew Brzezinski, gave an interview to The Daily Beast in which he suggested President Obama should make it clear to Israel that if they attempt to attack Iran’s nuclear weapons sites the U.S. Air Force will stop them.

“We are not exactly impotent little babies,” Brzezinski said. “They have to fly over our airspace in Iraq. Are we just going to sit there and watch? … We have to be serious about denying them that right. That means a denial where you aren’t just saying it. If they fly over, you go up and confront them. They have the choice of turning back or not. No one wishes for this but it could be a ‘Liberty’ in reverse.”

And, from what I have read extensively about the modus operandi of the globalists plus having read “The Grand Chessboard” in entirety by Brzezinski and recognising whose payroll he is on and whose orders he takes (Rockefeller’s), I can see exactly that the grand scheme in this is to remove any and all Israeli threat to the Middle East (either destroying in totality the state called Israel or simply removing the zionist/jewish homeland ideology of it and its regime) and uniting the Islamic republics under a strong central core (which I believe may well be Iran) with globalist puppet leaders in Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan, Egypt etc etc etc. Such a region – wholly controlled by globalist interests – then “making amends” with the west and becoming “friends” and turning on the major “enemy” of the globalists: China. That is the intention. That is the globalist agenda. Taming China and Asia and then creating the One world government under globalist/banking control. The western nations already succumbed centuries ago. Parts of Asia already have such as Singapore and the Philippines (also Australia). Africa will be off limits to China resource-wise once the Middle East and the west make their “pact”. We can see Italy and Greece being run now by trilateralist central bankers. My only question is Russia. They are still very much influenced by the “Zionist”/”jewish” west but it is questionable by how much. Putin for instance doesn’t seem too enamoured by Rothschild.

So Israel the upshot is: You are a pawn and while you see the sabre rattling by the US and the west against Iran, the real target is you!

 

While here’s one last little quirk to think about:

Do you remember earlier the Telegraph report suggesting perhaps a strike by Israel in the Summer of 2012?

Just so happens that’s Zion Olympics!

And David Cameron has stated he is going to have surface to air missiles at the ready to defend against what? Terrorists? I mean there are terrorists and there are terrorists right?

surface-air-missiles-olympic-games-214629358.html

“Come on down to London and enjoy the 2012 Zion Olympics. 1000 FBI agents, Mossad agents – this is the Olympics to end all olympics! It’s the MOTHER (fcuker) of all olympics! We even have Surface to Air missiles ready for launch against …… what? More hijacked planes? The Royal Airforce can’t send up intercepts to hijacked passenger aircraft? You think the men in caves have got hold of a nuke? Perhaps one you lost David?

Christ lads! Whatever you do, don’t try to set any new world records for javelin or discus throwing otherwise you may just set off something else if you throw them to high and far: You may set off World War 3 and end up with not a new world record but a NEW WORLD ORDER!

BE WARNED!

 

 

 

Barack Obama assassination attempt?

No. Not in a million years.

This is a false flag set up start to finish.

US police arrest White House drive-by shooting suspect Barack Obama’s apartment in the White house was hit by at least one bullet that cracked a window, US Secret Service has said.

Shooting suspect Oscar Ramiro Ortega Photo: AP By Barney Henderson 8:41PM GMT 16 Nov 2011

The bullets were thought to have been fired during a drive-by shooting that resulted in two bullets hitting the White House. One of the bullets was found impacted in the ballistic glass of an exterior window on the residential level where the president and his family live.

Police on Wednesday night arrested a 21-year-old Hispanic man in Pennsylvania in connection with the shooting.

Oscar Ortega-Hernandez was arrested by state police at a hotel near Indiana, the Secret Service special agent in charge, Edwin Donovan, said.

Witnesses heard shots and saw two speeding vehicles in the area, in between the White House and the Washington Monument, late on Friday night. An AK-47 rifle was recovered and semi-automatic gun was also involved, a US Park Police spokesman said.

President Obama and the first lady, Michelle Obama, were in California at the time of the shooting.

Related Articles Bullet ‘hit White House window’ 16 Nov 2011

Officials could be seen taking photographs of a window on the south face of the executive mansion yesterday.

The probe has not yet “conclusively connected” the bullets found on the White House grounds to Friday’s incident.

Ortega is from Idaho Falls, Idaho, and was believed to be living in the Washington area. He was reported missing Oct 31 by his family. He has an arrest record in three states but has not been linked to any radical organisations, US Park Police said.

Mr Ortega is described as a 5’11, white Hispanic male of medium build, with several distinguishing tattoos – including three dots on his right hand, his name across his back and the word Israel tattooed on his neck.

“As the investigation unfolded, the US Park Police located a vehicle in the 2300 block of Constitution Avenue,” the US Park Police said in an earlier statement.

“Evidence in the vehicle led to us obtaining an arrest warrant for Oscar Ortega.”

US-police-arrest-White-House-drive-by-shooting-suspect.html

WERE IT SOME WHITE NATIONALIST GROUP LOGO HE’D HAD ON HIS NECK- THE MASS MEDIA WOULD HAVE PLAYED BIG WITH IT- ISRAEL BRANDED GETS NOT A MENTION IN THE AIRWAYS. KINDA MAKES SENSE WHY HE TRIED TO GUN DOWN OBAMA- WHEN ISRAEL IS WHERE HIS ALLEGIENCES LIE!!

Zionist Bullets Shot Across Obama’s Bow?

by Kevin Barrett

Is the state of Israel threatening the life of the President of the United States?

To those brainwashed by America’s Zionist corporate media, the question sounds like paranoid fantasy. But the truth is that powerful geopolitical actors do sometimes attempt to intimidate each other through “plausibly deniable” threats. And the Zionists, masters of hardball realpolitik, are said to do such things with some regularity, not to mention chutzpah.

Item: Obama leaves his microphone on to tell the world that Netanyahu is a liar. Zionist flack Dennis Ross is ejected from the White House. It looks like Obama isn’t going to obey Netanyahu’s orders to attack Iran.

Item: A bullet slams into a White House window. A “lone nut,” branded like a steer by the word Israel tattooed on his neck, is arrested and charged with the crime.

Item: The FBI arrests some anti-Obama “good ole boys” armed with “52 weapons, including assault rifles, and 30,000 rounds of ammunition, including special sniper rounds.” The crackers were targeting Obama, Eric Holder, and Cynthia McKinney. The ostensible message: “Us crackers gonna get you uppity communistic niggaz.” Translated from cracker-speak, the real message might be: “Us Zionists gonna get you uppity pro-Palestinian schwartzes unless you attack Iran when we tell you to.”

Any way you parse it, Netanyahu is obviously out of control, and he and his doomed, illegitimate settler colony are trying to drag the world down with them. Maybe it’s time for the US to retaliate in kind, and send out some bullets with Netanyahu’s name on them.

——————————————————————————–

Listen to my interviews with Gordon Duff and Cynthia McKinney, both of which touched on Obama’s dissing Netanyahu, and Netanyahu’s possible response.

zionist-bullets-shots-across-obamas-bow

 

I have said, time and time again, that the REAL intentions of the zionists I refer to (and they, as I see it, are simply an arm of the jesuit order while I admit to mixing them both together at times and referring to them as Zionists) is to destroy the Israeli government because it is of no further use and has passed its sell by date.

What has me state this so strongly? Well another thing I state time and again is that people should (must) read Zbigniew Brzezinski’s book “The Grand Chessboard”. Not just read quotes from it but read the entire thing.

Brzezinski also is on record as stating that, if Israel were to attack Iran, America would have to send fighter jets up to intercept!

Brzezinski is Obama’s MENTOR and he is Obama’s Democratic equivalent to Henry Kissinger re geopolitical strategy.

The agenda by the British/American globalist/Zionist faction is to rid the Middle East of Israel (or at least Israel as it currently exists politically and as a regional superpower) and end up with a Middle East entirely composed of muslim power, an Islamic caliphate.

“But we’re against Islam” I hear you say!

Let me tell you something: These bastards are strategists. Get that in your head. As a strategist in geopolitics you don’t go rushing in and blowing trumpets and you keep your friends close and enemies closer. You then fcuk your enemy over.

To ANY jew reading this: Your ZIONIST “chums” are working on fcuking you over once more!

So, the hispanic had “Israel” tattooed on his neck did he? Makes absolute sense because what they want to do is portray Israel as a “mad dog” and dangerous to the world – which it actually is BUT the people who have created this “mad dog” (and I speak of it as a “mad dog” from the words of Israeli top brass themselves) now want to destroy it because the International “jews” – the Zionists – or Churchill’s “atheist jews” don’t have the slightest interest in a patch of land. These people work with the real power to KEEP their power globally and if Israel – a chess piece – is getting in the way, then Israel will be sacrificed.

The Arab Springs are Western/Zionist manipulated (CIA) events and, as we can see in Greece and in Italy with new leadership picked from the Trilateral Commission etc, the new Arab leaders are also Western globalist puppets and the Arab people are not quite getting this.

Now Iraq is under western control and Libya. My own feeling is that the wonderful Mr Ahmadinejad is laughing and grinning his way through a negotiation with the west to a point where he wishes Iran to be the leading nation in the Middle East and then, with the west’s blessing, Iran will be so.

Once this is achieved, the Middle East is filled with puppet regimes (and the west filled with globalist puppet leaders) and, together, the christian west and Asian/Middle Eastern Muslim world will stand shoulder to shoulder against the prime target for Brzezinski: CHINA.

Russia is still questionable at this stage.

READ “THE GRAND CHESSBOARD”.

 

If that had been any form of a real assassination attempt, then like JFK, Obama would be dead. Obama was not even in Washington D.C. and if someone was serious in intent, do you think FOR ONE MOMENT they are going to just plug bullets in windows while driving by? With no sign or even idea that anyone was in the room nevermind Obama! Do you think someone is truly as incompetent as this if they have serious intent? While they chance being jailed for a very long time having not even having their target in sight?

How gullible are you?

Meanwhile, he just so happens to have “Israel” stamped on his neck?

Jesus H Christ people wake up! You’re not 8 year olds anymore who, even they, have a hard time accepting fairy stories!

 

United Nations legalizes murder!

Yes you read that properly!

UNTIL PEOPLE START TO TAKE SERIOUS NOTE OF WHAT THESE INSTITUTIONS, SUCH AS THE UN, STATE IN THEIR “WONDERFUL” DOCUMENTS, WE ARE GOING TO GET NO FURTHER FORWARD IN ACHIEVING TRUE UNIVERSAL FREEDOMS FOR MANKIND.

A 24 year old Iraqi War veteran by the name of Scott Olsen, is currently in hospital asking himself what the hell he fought for his country for? He goes to Iraq to “DEFEND FREEDOM” (let’s ignore the joke in that statement for now) and arrives back into the bosom of safety of his home country in one piece. THEN, he is shot in the head at point blank range by Oakland California Police operating on the orders of the Oakland Mayor Jean Quan.

HOW IRONIC!

He didn’t get a “purple heart” he got a crimson skull. While his comrades are putting their lives on the line overseas for the freedom of the very small fraction of the American people (perhaps 0.01% nevermind 1%) who are globalists – they are NOT Americans whether they hold an American passport and were born there or not, America is just ONE patch of land to them and they want it all! - and who want a One World government and a One world army to protect them as they gather up continuously, the wealth of nations and the wealth of “their own” Americans. These globalists are using the UN to destroy the sovereignty of the very USA the troops THINK they are fighting for!

I think the US Marines are fighting in the wrong countries don’t you?

And HOW they can think they are fighting for American freedom is entirely beyond me. It takes some kind of pea sized brain not to see what is going on now!

But, let’s take a look at the UNITED NATIONS ARTICLES ON HUMAN RIGHTS for a moment shall we?

Section I – Rights and freedoms

Article 2 – Right to life

1. Everyone’s right to life shall be protected by law. No one shall be deprived
   of his life intentionally save in the execution of a sentence of a court
   following his conviction of a crime for which this penalty is provided by law.
2. Deprivation of life shall not be regarded as inflicted in contravention of this article when it results from the use of force which is no more than absolutely necessary:
   1. in defence of any person from unlawful violence;
   2. in order to effect a lawful arrest or to prevent the escape of a person
      lawfully detained; (A “lawful” arrest or a “legal” arrest? It does not state, anywhere, arrest for what? Stealing a packet of winegums?”)
   3. in action lawfully taken for the purpose of quelling a riot or insurrection.

Now, let’s zoom in and focus on c:

WHO decides on what is termed a riot? The NYPD against Occupy Wall Street protestors? The policeman in London who killed Ian Tomlinson while the policeman was acting in a CAPACITY of Law Enforcer for the State? It was the State that murdered Ian Tomlinson! Mayor  Jean Quan of Oakland California?

OAKLAND CALIFORNIA MAYOR JEAN QUAN

No, none of them. WHO decides, once more, is Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan as they FUND the Police (essentially bribing them). The message is “Do as you’re told lads and protect our criminality and you will be adequately compensated. Therefore, you can be on the PEOPLE’S side (and good luck) or you can be on OUR side and you will keep your jobs, be adequately paid for it and you have the “law” on your side (which we write by the way) if you murder someone when we have deemed the public action a riot or insurrection.

Please READ and UNDERSTAND the following blog which attempts to illustrate, clear as day, HOW the UN and all state law, has manipulated people into subrogating their god given rights to a criminal FICTION called “legality”:

u-n-inadvertently-confirms-freeman-concept

Let me state this as plainly as possible: The United States President, Barack Obama, previous Presidents and the entire US Congress and Senate all work for the same people in power (as do the UK government).

The people in power are the lenders in a lender/borrower relationship. The lender ALWAYS is the controller just as is the case when you apply for a mortgage. The lender owns your ass until you pay back in full. This is precisely what is happening and has happened now for centuries under the PRIVATE operation and control of the Federal Reserve Bank, the Bank of England and the entire Central Banking system which IS in Private hands. A FACT I have shown time and again on many other logs within this overall blog.

Who are the Lenders? The BANKS. But not Fred Goodwin and the like… no no no. He’s just a monkey and wouldn’t understand this if his life depended upon it. The BANKS are the very tiny fraction of humanity who control the IMF, Bank of International Settlements, Federal Reserve, Bank of England and all National Central Banks which live under the banner of “democracy”. Those ones which don’t and are not controlled by this cabal are,,, well they used to be under the “Axis of Evil” but there’s not many left. Libya just fell for instance.

Who are the borrowers? “Democratic” governments!

This is, as an aside, why if you are corruptly thrown in jail in Syria or Sudan and any other targeted “non democratic” country, your “democratic” state will help you get released by interfering in these Sovereign nations’ legal system. IF, however, you are thrown in jail corruptly by what these “democratic states” recognise as another “democratic state” (such as, what shall we say? Singapore for example?) then your state will will NOT bat an eyelid and allow you to be corruptly incarcerated on the excuse of “We cannot interfere in another sovereign country’s legal system”. Really? You just bomb the hell out of those sovereign countries you don’t like then huh? But that’s NOT “interference” in their legal system is it?

You hypocritical, corrupt arseholes are so transparent it’s incredible!

Does Keith Olbermann understand this? These people report and they talk about left wing and right wing politics while such does not even exist EXCEPT to give the masses the IDEA they have a choice. As George Carlin once said: “You have no choice, you have owners!” When will these talking heads listen and understand? I assume never. Then, that being so, “Houston, we have a problem”.

PLEASE do your research and start to understand how an American War veteran can retun safely to the United States only then to have his skull fractured by a LEGAL BULLET from one of his own!

So, a question:

Is this what American troops are dying for? Really? This is freedom? Then enjoy your freedom!

An American gets shot by Americans. Other Americans run to help him. The Americans who shot him then attack those trying to help him.

This reminds me of something…..now what is it? Ah Yes……this:

So, sorry troops, until you wake up and attack the REAL enemy, I can only agree with the following:

WHAT GOES AROUND COMES AROUND HUH?

WAKE UP YOU LOT WHO TAKE ORDERS BUT REFUSE TO THINK! YOU’RE GIVING HUMANITY A BAD NAME! The Aliens think we have really poor IQs. Well, I guess some of us do!

Al Qaeda given free pass to London Olympics!

Do you know that according to MI5, the ONLY groups to describe THEMSELVES as “Terrorists” have been The Stern Gang and The Irgun?

Is stating this “anti semitic”? Is it? For I simply pull this information from the pages of a book entitled “In defence of the realm – A history of MI5″. I suggest, then, that it is the authors of this book and MI5 which the Zionist Israeli state, ADL and/or our own internal Zionists, namely Cameron, Hague etc, take to task. I am but a messenger. But then they shoot messengers don’t they?

Why do I say they shoot messengers? Well, it’s like this: When terrorism strikes, it is rare that the building or area it strikes ever sees any casualties in the “top brass”. Think of 9/11: The alleged “Plane” didn’t hit the side of the building where all the top brass like Rumsfeld and Co were stationed, it hit a little “backwater” on the other side.

The Irgun were responsible for the first terrorist action in history when they bombed the King David Hotel in Jerusalem in July 1946, which was the British Government headquarters in Palestine. Yet, strangely, once more, not a single high level official was killed or even hurt in that blast.

No the people who matter are never killed in these “tragedies” just as Larry Silverstein didn’t go to breakfast that fateful  morning of September 11th 2001 and the JP Morgan employees who mattered were told to attend their meeting, originally set for the towers, in offices further up the street while others were left to die.

Or just like Benjamin Netanyahu on the day of the 7/7 London bombings being told to stay in his hotel room just across from one of the tube stations when he was due to attend a meeting.

And so many more but all just “coincidence”. I am a lover of “Coincidence Theory” aren’t you? The vast majority of government, intelligence and the sleepy little public are. Why not join them? The world is such a sunny place if you do UNTIL YOU’RE BLOWN TO SMITHEREENS!

The Irgun or Irgun Zevai Leumi to give it its full title, was a Zionist paramilitary group that operated in Mandate Palestine between 1931 and 1948. It was an offshoot of the earlier and larger Jewish paramilitary organization haHaganah. When the group broke from the Haganah it became known as the Haganah Bet, or alternatively as haHaganah haLeumit or Ha’ma’amad (Hamas? ;-0). Irgun members were absorbed into the Israel Defence Forces at the start of the 1948 Arab-Israeli war.

The Irgun was a political predecessor to Israel’s right-wing Herut (or “Freedom”) party, which led to today’s Likud party. Likud has led or been part of most Israeli governments since 1977.

The Irgun disagreed with the policy of the Yishuv and with the World Zionist Organization, both with regard to strategy and basic ideology and with regard to PR and military tactics, such as use of armed force to accomplish the Zionist ends, operations against the Arabs during the riots, and relations with the British mandatory government. Therefore the Irgun tended to ignore the decisions made by the Zionist leadership and the Yishuv’s institutions. This fact caused the elected bodies not to recognize the independent organization, and during most of the time of its existence the organization was seen as irresponsible, and its actions thus worthy of thwarting. Therefore the Irgun accompanied its armed operations with public relations campaigns, in order to convince the public of the Irgun’s way and the problems with the official political leadership of the Yishuv.

Menachem Begin: Leader of Irgun Terrorists and Murderers becomes Leader of Israel.

In late 1943, Menachem Begin accepted his position within the Irgun, a new leadership was formed.  Begin even assumed a Rabbi’s identity (“Yisrael Sasover”), and was sometimes known as “Ben Ze’ev” or “Dr. Kenigshopper”. Now imagine a terrorist going on to become the Prime Minister of the UK! But no, strike that. You don’t have to imagine it, we’ve already got it and had it. The present one even declares himself a Zionist with “jewish values” for christ’s sakes! LOL You couldn’t make it up!

David Cameron: Advises Israel Likud leadership that he is a Zionist and has their values and becomes PM of the UK. First job: Destroy Libya.

Now, Begin became PM of Israel leading the Likud party. Yitshak Shamir (ex Stern Gang leader) and Ariel Sharon also. Today we have Netanyahu and Tzipi Livni. ALL of them leading a Likud Party government and all of them coming into politics via an IDF which had embraced the terrorists that were Irgun (and Stern Gang). Furthermore, when considering the Stern Gang, consider this:

"I'm Bibi Netanyahu and I hope you hate Gazans too! The world may try to stop us but we own the US Congress!"

Lehi (Stern Gang) assassinated Lord Moyne, British Minister Resident in the Middle East, and made many other attacks on the British in Palestine. It was described as a terrorist organization by the British authorities.Lehi assassinated United Nations mediator Folke Bernadotte and was banned by the Israeli government. The United Nations Security Council called the assassins “a criminal group of terrorists,” and Lehi was similarly condemned by Bernadotte’s replacement as mediator, Ralph Bunche. Lehi and Irgun were jointly responsible for the massacre in Deir Yassin.

Israel granted a general amnesty to Lehi members on 14 February 1949. In 1980, Israel instituted a military decoration, the Lehi ribbon. Former Lehi leader Yitzhak Shamir became Prime Minister of Israel in 1983.

IN 1980 ISRAEL INSTITUTED A MILITARY DECORATION, THE LEHI RIBBON – TO COMMEMORATE TERRORISTS AND MURDERERS OF BRITISH POLITICIANS! THEY THEN ALLOW THESE MURDERERS TO BECOME LEADERS OF THE ISRAELI NATION!

In 1980, Israel instituted the Lehi ribbon, red, black, grey, pale blue and white, which is awarded to former members of the Lehi underground who wished to carry it, "for military service towards the establishment of the State of Israel".

And even until today, the Likud celebrate that murder while our government lick their arse to the extent that they have even amended our “laws” to ensure that not one member of the Israeli government can be arrested for warcrimes. You see, “law” in this country is only what they wish it to be and there was a little loophole they had to fill to protect the guilty:

Then, of course, you had Yitzhak Rabin. A jew yes, a Zionist? Perhaps in HIS definition but certainly not in the definition of the Likud Party, The Stern Gang, Irgun etc. So he’s assassinated by the obligatory “Lone Gunman”. It just so happens, however, that the very person he tells his plan to was an Israeli Secret Service guy! Funny then how the Israeli secret service did not/could not simply stop him from carrying the threat out now isn’t it? We foil all sorts of “conspiracies” to murder, terrorise etc and here we have someone actually stating his intention but no, not this time – it goes ahead anyway!

During his years as an activist, Amir became friendly with Avishai Raviv, to whom he revealed his plan to kill Rabin. While Raviv posed as a right-wing radical, he was working for the Shabak, the Israeli secret service.

Funny how the intelligence agencies ALWAYS come into the picture now isn’t it?

You NEVER get a PM or a President assassinated if he calls the Armed Forces to destroy a sovereign country based upon outright lies but, you have a leader who is going to have peace break out and BANG! He’s dead from a lone gunman’s shot! Everytime. Without fail! And we STILL suck it up!

Yitzhak Rabin: No "Zionist" in the true, occult meaning of the word.

So, anyhow, “Al Qaeda given free pass to Olympic Games”?? Are you crazy?

Well no. I’m anything but while the “Coincidence theory” proponents of this world will suggest so – a little like that idiot Nick Pope.

Who IS “Al Qaeda”? PLEASE don’t tell me you are still believing in the fairy stories of Muslim shepherds on horseback and shadowy sandal wearing, cave dwelling (caves that didn’t exist) bearded “ghosts” crying “Allah Akhbar”.

Please don’t tell me you believe in men, who are intelligent enough to not only fly planes and get passed the most severe security apparatus in the world but also are LONDON SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS students, that have a whole life ahead of them but they choose to commit suicide. I mean what the hell are you if you do believe this SHIT? As gullible as a 4 year old who believes in Santa and the Tooth Fairy for god’s sakes?

The laughing gnomes (or patsies). I wonder where they are today? Bullet in the head or on a beach somewhere with their CIA money and Sangria? Or were they, in fact on a guided "missile" even though they weren't listed on the passenger manifests?

Do you really believe this shit? Then seriously – go see a psychologist!

Let’s try to be adult here – by adult I mean use one’s god given brain and logic. “Al Qaeda” is and always was a construct of the Intelligence services. At the heart of those intelligence services are the CIA, Mossad and MI5/MI6.

Going back to the “Defence of the Realm” book once more. Another interesting little nugget in that book was the following: It stated that it was not until 1998 that MI5 first managed to get a recording of Bin Laden’s voice – As if Bin Laden was some kind of “ghost” who had never been heard of or seen before. You are meant to ignore or forget the fact that Bin Laden had been working for the CIA for years beforehand and that Zbigniew Brzezinski, among others, had met and spoken with him as far back as the early 80s when. while being supported by CIA, Bin Laden was providing support to the Mujahidin in their fight against the Russians. But just forget all that. MI5 states in a book that it was they who finally got a recording of Bin Laden’s voice. The next point then is strange because, all of a sudden, after it taking an eternity to find a voice recording of Bin Laden, it was ONLY then that they then say “Al Qaeda” was invented. I guess this is because the recording had Bin Laden say “I will call my nasty terrorist group “Al Qaeda” in memory of the original CIA database of all our names in the Mujahidin. Just don’t call me Tim”.

Another strange thing happened once MI5 found that recording. All of a sudden (and remember I am only regurgitating from the book) all of this “intelligence” started spurting forth about this group called “Al Qaeda”. All of a sudden. “Al Qaeda” was plotting everything from attacking the USA with chemical, biological and nuclear weapons to blowing up the public toilets outisde Highbury stadium because they also found out Bin Laden was a Man U fan! Or perhaps that was a mistranslation! MI5 agents refuse to comment on the grounds of national security!

So, again, how is it that “Al Qaeda” is being given a free pass to the London Olympics?

Well here’s why: They aren’t called the ZION Olympics for nothing…..

Mossad helps UK secure Olympics

Israeli secret service participates in
drill that simulates 1972 terrorist attack on Jewish athletes in
Munich

Yaniv Halili

//

Mossad officials participated in a security drill at London’s Olympic Park
last weekend.

A source at the British Cabinet told Yedioth Ahronoth that the drill
simulated a terrorist attack on athletes, similar to the one that occurred in
the Munich Olympics in 1972, when Palestinian terrorists took over the building
where the Israeli delegation was staying, and killed 11 of them.

The UK’s entire defense establishment, including the emergency services,
participated in the massive drill, which was held secretly by the British
Defense Ministry.

But British intelligence officials were not satisfied, and invited their
Mossad counterparts to share their experience.

The drill simulated a scenario where athletes are held hostage by terrorists.
A large part of the exercise took place inside the park’s residential buildings,
under live fire. The village was surrounded by guards who kept out
onlookers.

A source at the British Olympic Association said that “certain Israeli
elements are advising us on securing the Olympic games.” Israel is considered an authority on urban warfare.

Coming your way London: You can be sure Israel will pick up a few valuable "gold medals" at this year's games. Just perhaps not on the track and field events. Perhaps the shooting though!

The UK has allocated nearly a billion dollars for the security of the
athletic event – more than 10% of the event’s budget.

Last weekend’s drill is the first in a series exercises that are expected to
take place in the coming month. The British defense establishment is also
preparing to deal with attacks on other Olympic facilities and on the streets of
London, which will be flooded with tourists come next July.

YNet News:  0,7340,L-4067585,00.html

And you wonder why we have this: 

And this:

But, you say, “It’s just showing respect!”

Yes, I say, but if you were being given $millions to show your respect wouldn’t you?

Work it out! It really isn’t rocket science!

Imagine if Halliburton had had a document or documents pertaining to the possibility of an event taking place in the Gulf of Mexico on a BP rig, written just a year or so prior to the event taking place and they said “We always plan for certain scenarios”, it would just be accepted as coincidence. This is the problem. For so many, no matter what you show, no matter how factual it is (like all the references to 9/11 before the event) they will say “coincidence”. We live among madmen and idiots.

You can’t ignore predictions like these of 9/11 and 7/7 (but what am I saying? You do!) while there are now similar being suggested for the 2012 Olympics and when you have David Cameron adding in Surface to Air missiles as a defence screen for a sporting event and you have Mossad and FBI etc etc getting in on the act, if YOU wish to go within 100 miles of London that’s entirely up to you.

But I’m sure it’ll be a blast!

Yvonne Fletcher: Murdered to get Gaddafi

The Intelligence services. There to protect – MY ASS!

There to protect yes but to protect the geopolitical interests of our governments and the Corporations who own our governments’ asses!

The Intelligence services, then, who will murder our own to achieve an advantage. The intelligence services who will TRAIN and use “Al Burkan” or, today, the FABLED “Al Qaeda” to gain advantage in this geopolitical chessboard.

The governments of America and Britain will condone, then cover up, the murder of innocents because it helps them to steer political opinion to support THEIR goals (not yours or mine).

The governments of America and Britain (and their fucked in the head, genocidal maniacs called Intelligence Services) who will treat YOU and the POLICE as idiots and grunts – THE POLICE WHO ARE TOLD THEY CAN HAVE NO POLITICAL OPINION WHILE ONE (and more) OF THEIR OWN GETS ASSASSINATED FOR POLITICAL GAIN!

You POLICE are FCUKING IMBECILES! Detectives MY ASS! You are IGNORANT TWATS who get played like the little non thinking, impotent, incapable pawns of a state that you are. Pawns of a state that will muder you for their own political benefit while they do ANYTHING and EVERYTHING to demonise whoever it may be who does not play along with the western imperialism and New World Order aims that they have.

While people like me and many others try to tell you what you are IGNORANTLY supporting (and if you aren’t ignorant then you are as much to blame for Yvonne Fletcher’s death and any other police or innocent civilians as those in government, Intelligence services and the terrorist criminals they SUPPORT!) and your beady little eyes glaze over while you state you haven’t even heard of ZIONISM! You CRETINS!

DISPATCHES:

So, if you have HALF a brain Mr Plod, watch this and see how one of your own was sacrificed by the very people you are employed to protect. She died for the sake of giving the Americans and the British an excuse to get hard on Gaddafi. It didn’t work out for them but it is now. It’s been a non stop strategy for decades to lay any and every charge on him (and no, before you zombies say it, I’m not pro Gaddafi. I’m not pro anyone. I’m just anti fcuking corruption and the entire western syatem is corrupt to the core and you little twats in uniform are treated as grunts just as our Armed Forces are – and the fact is, you have so little true fcuking backbone or intelligence, that you go along with it.) so as to get public support for our own government’s crimes.

Then hear the poor woman’s mother at the end: The government keep the cover up going (in the minds of the masses) because “why open up old wounds and hurt?”

PRECISELY what they say AGAIN and AGAIN about the events of 9/11 and 7/7.

It’s just such a great excuse for them to carry on doing what they do and then point to anyone who questions or knows they are outright, lying, genocidal maniacs – all for a profit – and say “do you have no respect for the dead? Leave it be” while, in fact, THEY have no respect for the dead because THEY killed them!

Meanwhile, we have “Al Qaeda” fighting on the side of the Rebels in Libya today. So “Al Qaeda” is on the side of NATO now??? That’s because “Al Qaeda” does not exist but is and always has been a CIA “unit” just as the CIA, in Yvonne Fletcher’s case (probably alongside Mossad and MI5/6) used THEIR “Al Burkan” assets!

And you can take it to the new Benghazi bank (strange how the first thing the Rebels thought of as this surge against Gaddafi began, was to open up a new Central Bank of Libya eh? Are you bloody stupid?) that those who are the rebels and the quiet anti Gaddafi people in his government WILL BE “Al Burkan” today!

You DIRTY BASTARDS!

“No we wouldn’t kill thousands of our own people in the World Trade Centre and Pentagon!”

TELL THAT TO SCHMUCKS WHO’LL BELIEVE THAT TRIPE!

How many witnesses stating the words “explosions” and “bombs” do you have to hear, while they are police, firefighters and citizens,  before you as a FCUKING DETECTIVE can work out that there were BOMBS GOING OFF?

“Hey Detective! There were bombs going off!”

Detective: “Who’s were they?

“Al Qaeda’s! It was written on the side with ‘Allah Akhbar’ scribbled on it too!”

Detective: “Ok we better report that!”

or,

“Hey Detective! There were bombs going off!”

Detective: “Who’s were they?”

“I dunno but they looked military types”

Detective: “Ok shut the hell up or I’ll have to shoot you!”

That about sums it up doesn’t it?

But hey, the 9/11 commission, carefully picked by the very people (i.e government officials) who thought it was politically expedient to MURDER ONE OF YOUR OWN, tells you it was just planes. A Commission that missed out MASSES of witness testimony who were not saying what the Commission was already told the story was! Commissioners who, not a single one of them, were specialists in any shape or form on architecture, construction, engineering or aeronautics. They were FCUKING POLITICIANS! THEN you have FOUR of them admitting they didn’t get the real truth from many of their witnesses and were stopped from covering a mass of issues.

Meanwhile, kill enough people (and there’s been more than what is shown on this vid) and you make damned sure that others shut the hell up now don’t you?

DETECTIVES indeed! Little State sponsored heavy mob more like. You don’t have an opinion indeed! The opinions you are ALLOWED to have are what you are told to have.

Much easier to do what you’re told and loot someone’s home based upon some malicious little twat on a messageboard faking offence eh? You owe me nearly £2K worth of equipment guys! Anti semitic my arse! If you can’t understand your world and what the HUGE difference is between Zionism and Judaism, then you really aren’t even QUALIFIED to have an opinion! But then you’re not allowed an opinion! LOL

Meanwhile, the little lackeys who call themselves Procurators and Magistrates just do what they’re told. “Give anyone who doesn’t walk the government line a hard time!” That about sums it up lads! Enjoy watching the next time one of your own gets a bullet through the head courtesy of the very people who’s dirty work you do!

Roseanne Barr speaks 9/11 truth

Roseanne Barr, on her blog, acts like a sane human and weighs up the evidence of what happened on 9/11. But, of course, because she does so, like all those who have gone before her, she gets attacked. Roseanne, you have “balls” and integrity. Nice one!

“i was warned that I will now be attacked by persons who question my integirty—this is what trying to hear fact over propaganda gets you these days–attacked.  I want to understand all sides of an issue and then make up my mind—if you have something to say in counter to jon, feel free to say it here as well–let’s get to the bottom of this whole thing and see if my guess is correct—I say Bush did this, as he was instructed to do by his dad cheney and bill clinton kennedy, and everybody else whose wealth increased after 9-11.  It was a red herring to empty the us coffers, to get rid of civil rights and jobs, and the working and middle classes.  I know it was a big scam because after we were attacked, they sent our army away from home–instead of keeping them here to defend us.  They left us here like they left the people floating away in katrina.  They are using the american people as human guinea pigs for medical experiments conducted by psychiatrists.  We had it too good for too long.  We got lazy and stupid and obese.  They are done with us now.  They see us as useless eaters.”

“Who are they?  They are the billionaires.  They are vampires who must always get more and more–and they never get enough.  They do not care that they use slaves, even if they are children.  They know that the filth of the world is dumped in Haiti, and that children there are dying from dirty water, but the rich don’t care about any of that.  They are addicts who need growth every quarter no matter where it comes from.  Psychotics are made not born.  The rich are psychotic and all on anti depressants.  they hate themselves for being pig like beings, but they still act pig like.  their cloven hoofs tell the tale.”

Oh but Roseanne, the epicentre is formed by people who FAR outstrip billionaires. Their $Trillions are held within “non profit Foundations” therefore they never, individually, show up on the Forbes Rich list. They are conspicuous, in fact, by their absence.

“John”:

“Evidence that contradicts the ruling belief system is held to extraordinary standards, while evidence that entrenches it is uncritically accepted.” -– Carl Sagan

People have been convicted and executed on far less evidence than the 9/11 investigators have against our “benevolent” leadership and its complicity in the 9/11 attacks and the subsequent coverup — a coverup which will continue regardless of who gets elected to the White House, because who gets elected is just a dog’n'pony show to make it seem like “we” have a choice and some say in what’s going on.

“For more than a century ideological extremists at either end of the political spectrum have seized upon the well-publicized incidents such as my encounter with Castro to attack the Rockefeller family for the inordinate influence they claim we wield over American political and economic institutions. Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as ‘internationalists’ and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure — one world, if you will. If that’s the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.” — David Rockefeller, Memoirs, p. 405

9/11 is just one of many conspiracies going on.  David Rockefeller can openly confess to a One World conspiracy, to the undermining of the best interests of the American people by his family for over a century, in-your-face got-his-jollies-from-it suck-it-cause-you-can’t-do-anything-about-it gloating, because our friends and neighbors couldn’t possibly care any less.  Anyone who wants to know the truth already does — it couldn’t be any more plain.

The problem isn’t getting the information out there.  It’s there.  The problem is summed up by that cliché that there is none so blind as him who will not see.  Until people decide that they don’t want to be lied to any more, the liars will continue to win, and the willingly-lied-to are just living in a kind of self-inflicted Matrix — no robotic overlords required.

That’s what needs to be overcome.  Joe American doesn’t want to know.  Ignorance is (a sort of) bliss, after all.

Reply

Roseanne  October 28, 2010 11:48 AM

you are completely right john–the american people do not want to know —the oligarchs hide the truth right out in the open, but mind control keeps us all in line–sometimes the 9-11 thing seems like mind control—an elite class of architects and fission scientists arguing minutae for a decade yet stopping short of naming the agents, always.  Perhaps they are using terrorism to bore everyone to death?

The real americans know who knocked down the towers–sadaam hussein!  (LOL).

Poppy did it so that he could get at the oil and the drugs and the no bid contracts…he built a shadow government starting with ollie north.  all americans were told every bit of this but they are drugged on poppy’s shit and can’t get sober enough to face reality. I really do think that usama bin laden did it–it was too smart an operation for our cia, who always get caught, whether by downloading child porn, or torturing  young men, or raping pre teen girls and therefore blowing each op.

brilliant-analysis-jon-gold.php

Scottish Police to Investigate Barack Obama for Anti semitism!

Well perhaps not. But perhaps the Procurator Fiscal should do! After all, the President of the United States is talking about the following cornerstone of our Constitution in glowing terms – and would you look at that: It’s anti semitic!! WTF???

Get the point boys?

No I guess you don’t. After all, you’re taught to have “no opinion” but just simply to do as you’re told. Like good little kindergartners!

Magna Carta 1215

Preamble:

John, by the grace of God, king of England, lord of Ireland,
duke of Normandy and Aquitaine, and count of Anjou, to the archbishop, bishops,
abbots, earls, barons, justiciaries, foresters, sheriffs, stewards, servants,
and to all his bailiffs and liege subjects, greetings. Know that, having regard
to God and for the salvation of our soul, and those of all our ancestors and
heirs, and unto the honor of God and the advancement of his holy Church and for
the rectifying of our realm, we have granted as underwritten by advice of our
venerable fathers, Stephen, archbishop of Canterbury, primate
of all England and cardinal of the holy Roman Church, Henry, archbishop of
Dublin, William of London, Peter of
Winchester, Jocelyn of Bath and Glastonbury, Hugh of Lincoln, Walter of Worcester, William of Coventry, Benedict of Rochester,
bishops; of Master Pandulf, subdeacon and member of the
household of our lord the Pope, of brother Aymeric (master of
the Knights of the Temple in England), and of the illustrious men William Marshal, earl of Pembroke, William,
earl of Salisbury, William, earl of Warenne, William, earl of Arundel, Alan of Galloway
(constable of Scotland), Waren Fitz Gerold, Peter Fitz
Herbert, Hubert De Burgh (seneschal of Poitou), Hugh de Neville, Matthew Fitz Herbert, Thomas Basset, Alan Basset, Philip
d’Aubigny, Robert of Roppesley, John
Marshal,John Fitz Hugh, and others, our liegemen.

1. In the first place we have granted to God, and by
this our present charter confirmed for us and our heirs forever that the English
Church shall be free, and shall have her rights entire, and her liberties
inviolate; and we will that it be thus observed; which is apparent from this
that the freedom of elections, which is reckoned most important and very
essential to the English Church, we, of our pure and unconstrained will, did
grant, and did by our charter confirm and did obtain the ratification of the
same from our lord, Pope Innocent III, before the quarrel arose between us and
our barons: and this we will observe, and our will is that it be observed in
good faith by our heirs forever. We have also granted to all freemen of our
kingdom, for us and our heirs forever, all the underwritten liberties, to be had
and held by them and their heirs, of us and our heirs forever.

2. If any of our earls or barons, or others holding of
us in chief by military service shall have died, and at the time of his death
his heir shall be full of age and owe “relief”, he shall have his inheritance by
the old relief, to wit, the heir or heirs of an earl, for the whole baroncy of
an earl by L100; the heir or heirs of a baron, L100 for a whole barony; the heir
or heirs of a knight, 100s, at most, and whoever owes less let him give less,
according to the ancient custom of fees.

3. If, however, the heir of any one of the aforesaid has
been under age and in wardship, let him have his inheritance without relief and
without fine when he comes of age.

4. The guardian of the land of an heir who is thus under
age, shall take from the land of the heir nothing but reasonable produce,
reasonable customs, and reasonable services, and that without destruction or
waste of men or goods; and if we have committed the wardship of the lands of any
such minor to the sheriff, or to any other who is responsible to us for its
issues, and he has made destruction or waster of what he holds in wardship, we
will take of him amends, and the land shall be committed to two lawful and
discreet men of that fee, who shall be responsible for the issues to us or to
him to whom we shall assign them; and if we have given or sold the wardship of
any such land to anyone and he has therein made destruction or waste, he shall
lose that wardship, and it shall be transferred to two lawful and discreet men
of that fief, who shall be responsible to us in like manner as aforesaid.

5. The guardian, moreover, so long as he has the
wardship of the land, shall keep up the houses, parks, fishponds, stanks, mills,
and other things pertaining to the land, out of the issues of the same land; and
he shall restore to the heir, when he has come to full age, all his land,
stocked with ploughs and wainage, according as the season of husbandry shall
require, and the issues of the land can reasonable bear.

6. Heirs shall be married without disparagement, yet so
that before the marriage takes place the nearest in blood to that heir shall
have notice.

7. A widow, after the death of her husband, shall
forthwith and without difficulty have her marriage portion and inheritance; nor
shall she give anything for her dower, or for her marriage portion, or for the
inheritance which her husband and she held on the day of the death of that
husband; and she may remain in the house of her husband for forty days after his
death, within which time her dower shall be assigned to her.

8. No widow shall be compelled to marry, so long as she
prefers to live without a husband; provided always that she gives security not
to marry without our consent, if she holds of us, or without the consent of the
lord of whom she holds, if she holds of another.

9. Neither we nor our bailiffs will seize any land or
rent for any debt, as long as the chattels of the debtor are sufficient to repay the debt; nor
shall the sureties of the debtor be distrained so long as the principal debtor is able to satisfy the
debt; and if the principal debtor shall fail to pay the debt, having nothing
wherewith to pay it, then the sureties shall answer for the debt; and let them
have the lands and rents of the debtor, if they desire them, until they are
indemnified for the debt which they have paid for him, unless the principal
debtor can show proof that he is discharged thereof as against the said
sureties.

10. If one who has borrowed from the Jews any sum,
great or small, die before that loan be repaid, the debt shall not bear interest
while the heir is under age, of whomsoever he may hold; and if the debt fall
into our hands, we will not take anything except the principal sum contained in
the bond.

11. And if anyone die indebted to the Jews, his wife
shall have her dower and pay nothing of that debt; and if any children of the
deceased are left under age, necessaries shall be provided for them in keeping
with the holding of the deceased; and out of the residue the debt shall be paid,
reserving, however, service due to feudal lords; in like manner let it be done
touching debts due to others than Jews.

12. No scutage not aid shall be imposed on our kingdom, unless by common
counsel of our kingdom, except for ransoming our person, for making our eldest
son a knight, and for once marrying our eldest daughter; and for these there
shall not be levied more than a reasonable aid. In like manner it shall be done
concerning aids from the city of London.

13. And the city of London shall have all it ancient
liberties and free customs, as well by land as by water; furthermore, we decree
and grant that all other cities, boroughs, towns, and ports shall have all their
liberties and free customs.

14. And for obtaining the common counsel of the kingdom
anent the assessing of an aid (except in the three cases aforesaid) or of a
scutage, we will cause to be summoned the archbishops, bishops, abbots, earls,
and greater barons, severally by our letters; and we will moveover cause to be
summoned generally, through our sheriffs and bailiffs, and others who hold of us
in chief, for a fixed date, namely, after the expiry of at least forty days, and
at a fixed place; and in all letters of such summons we will specify the reason
of the summons. And when the summons has thus been made, the business shall
proceed on the day appointed, according to the counsel of such as are present,
although not all who were summoned have come.

15. We will not for the future grant to anyone license
to take an aid from his own free tenants, except to ransom his person, to make
his eldest son a knight, and once to marry his eldest daughter; and on each of
these occasions there shall be levied only a reasonable aid.

16. No one shall be distrained for performance of
greater service for a knight’s fee, or for any other free tenement, than is due
therefrom.

17. Common pleas shall not follow our court, but shall
be held in some fixed place.

18. Inquests of novel disseisin, of mort
d’ancestor, and of darrein
presentment shall not be held elsewhere than in their own county courts, and
that in manner following; We, or, if we should be out of the realm, our chief
justiciar, will send two justiciaries through every county four times a year,
who shall alone with four knights of the county chosen by the county, hold the
said assizes in the county court,
on the day and in the place of meeting of that court.

19. And if any of the said assizes cannot be taken on
the day of the county court, let there remain of the knights and freeholders,
who were present at the county court on that day, as many as may be required for
the efficient making of judgments, according as the business be more or less.

20. A freeman shall not be amerced for a slight offense, except
in accordance with the degree of the offense; and for a grave offense he shall
be amerced in accordance with the gravity of the offense, yet saving always his
“contentment”; and a merchant in the same way, saving his “merchandise”; and a
villein shall be amerced in the same way, saving his “wainage” if they have
fallen into our mercy: and none of the aforesaid amercements shall be imposed
except by the oath of honest men of the neighborhood.

21. Earls and barons shall not be amerced except
through their peers, and only in accordance with the degree of the offense.

22. A clerk shall not be amerced in respect of his lay
holding except after the manner of the others aforesaid; further, he shall not
be amerced in accordance with the extent of his ecclesiastical benefice.

23. No village or individual shall be compelled to make
bridges at river banks, except those who from of old were legally bound to do
so.

24. No sheriff, constable, coroners, or others of our
bailiffs, shall hold pleas of our Crown.

25. All counties, hundred, wapentakes, and trithings
(except our demesne manors) shall remain at the old rents, and without any
additional payment.

26. If anyone holding of us a lay fief shall die, and
our sheriff or bailiff shall exhibit our letters patent of summons for a debt
which the deceased owed us, it shall be lawful for our sheriff or bailiff to
attach and enroll the chattels of the deceased, found upon the lay fief, to the
value of that debt, at the sight of law worthy men, provided always that nothing
whatever be thence removed until the debt which is evident shall be fully paid
to us; and the residue shall be left to the executors to fulfill the will of the
deceased; and if there be nothing due from him to us, all the chattels shall go
to the deceased, saving to his wife and children their reasonable shares.

27. If any freeman shall die intestate, his chattels shall be
distributed by the hands of his nearest kinsfolk and friends, under supervision
of the Church, saving to every one the debts which the deceased owed to him.

28. No constable or other bailiff of ours shall take
corn or other provisions from anyone without immediately tendering money
therefor, unless he can have postponement thereof by permission of the seller.

29. No constable shall compel any knight to give money
in lieu of castle-guard, when he is willing to perform it in his own person, or
(if he himself cannot do it from any reasonable cause) then by another
responsible man. Further, if we have led or sent him upon military service, he
shall be relieved from guard in proportion to the time during which he has been
on service because of us.

30. No sheriff or bailiff of ours, or other person,
shall take the horses or carts of any freeman for transport duty, against the
will of the said freeman.

31. Neither we nor our bailiffs shall take, for our
castles or for any other work of ours, wood which is not ours, against the will
of the owner of that wood.

32. We will not retain beyond one year and one day, the
lands those who have been convicted of felony, and the lands shall thereafter be
handed over to the lords of the fiefs.

33. All kydells for the future shall be removed
altogether from Thames and Medway, and throughout all England, except upon the
seashore.

34. The writ which is called praecipe shall not for the future be
issued to anyone, regarding any tenement whereby a freeman may lose his court.

35. Let there be one measure of wine throughout our
whole realm; and one measure of ale; and one measure of corn, to wit, “the
London quarter”; and one width of cloth (whether dyed, or russet, or
“halberget”), to wit, two ells within the selvedges; of weights also let it be
as of measures.

36. Nothing in future shall be given or taken for awrit
of inquisition of life or limbs, but freely it shall be granted, and never
denied.

37. If anyone holds of us by fee-farm, either by socage or by burage, or of any other land by
knight’s service, we will not (by reason of that fee-farm, socage, or burgage),
have the wardship of the heir, or of such land of his as if of the fief of that
other; nor shall we have wardship of that fee-farm, socage, or burgage, unless
such fee-farm owes knight’s service. We will not by reason of any small
serjeancy which anyone may hold of us by the service of rendering to us knives,
arrows, or the like, have wardship of his heir or of the land which he holds of
another lord by knight’s service.

38. No bailiff for the future shall, upon his own
unsupported complaint, put anyone to his “law”, without credible witnesses
brought for this purposes.

39. No freemen shall be taken or imprisoned or disseised or exiled or in any way
destroyed, nor will we go upon him nor send upon him, except by the lawful
judgment of his peers or by the law of the land.

40. To no one will we sell, to no one will we refuse or
delay, right or justice.

41. All merchants shall have safe and secure exit from
England, and entry to England, with the right to tarry there and to move about
as well by land as by water, for buying and selling by the ancient and right
customs, quit from all evil tolls, except (in time of war) such merchants as are
of the land at war with us. And if such are found in our land at the beginning
of the war, they shall be detained, without injury to their bodies or goods,
until information be received by us, or by our chief justiciar, how the
merchants of our land found in the land at war with us are treated; and if our
men are safe there, the others shall be safe in our land.

42. It shall be lawful in future for anyone (excepting
always those imprisoned or outlawed in accordance with the law of the kingdom,
and natives of any country at war with us, and merchants, who shall be treated
as if above provided) to leave our kingdom and to return, safe and secure by
land and water, except for a short period in time of war, on grounds of public
policy- reserving always the allegiance due to us.

43. If anyone holding of some escheat (such as the honor of
Wallingford, Nottingham, Boulogne, Lancaster, or of other escheats which are in
our hands and are baronies) shall die, his heir shall give no other relief, and
perform no other service to us than he would have done to the baron if that
barony had been in the baron’s hand; and we shall hold it in the same manner in
which the baron held it.

44. Men who dwell without the forest need not
henceforth come before our justiciaries of the forest upon a general summons,
unless they are in plea, or sureties of one or more, who are attached for the
forest.

45. We will appoint as justices, constables, sheriffs,
or bailiffs only such as know the law of the realm and mean to observe it well.

46. All barons who have founded abbeys, concerning
which they hold charters from the kings of England, or of which they have long
continued possession, shall have the wardship of them, when vacant, as they
ought to have.

47. All forests that have been made such in our time
shall forthwith be disafforsted; and a similar course shall be followed with
regard to river banks that have been placed “in defense” by us in our time.

48. All evil customs connected with forests and
warrens, foresters and warreners, sheriffs and their officers, river banks and
their wardens, shall immediately by inquired into in each county by twelve sworn
knights of the same county chosen by the honest men of the same county, and
shall, within forty days of the said inquest, be utterly abolished, so as never
to be restored, provided always that we previously have intimation thereof, or
our justiciar, if we should not be in England.

49. We will immediately restore all hostages and
charters delivered to us by Englishmen, as sureties of the peace of faithful
service.

50. We will entirely remove from their bailiwicks, the
relations of Gerard of Athee (so that in future they shall have
no bailiwick in England); namely, Engelard of Cigogne, Peter, Guy, and Andrew of
Chanceaux, Guy of Cigogne, Geoffrey of
Martigny with his brothers, Philip Mark with his brothers and
his nephewGeoffrey, and the whole brood of the same.

51. As soon as peace is restored, we will banish from
the kingdom all foreign born knights, crossbowmen, serjeants, and mercenary
soldiers who have come with horses and arms to the kingdom’s hurt.

52. If anyone has been dispossessed or removed by us,
without the legal judgment of his peers, from his lands, castles, franchises, or
from his right, we will immediately restore them to him; and if a dispute arise
over this, then let it be decided by the five and twenty barons of whom mention
is made below in the clause for securing the peace. Moreover, for all those
possessions, from which anyone has, without the lawful judgment of his peers,
been disseised or removed, by our father, King Henry, or by our
brother, King Richard, and which we retain in our hand (or
which as possessed by others, to whom we are bound to warrant them) we shall
have respite until the usual term of crusaders; excepting those things about
which a plea has been raised, or an inquest made by our order, before our taking
of the cross; but as soon as we return from the expedition, we will immediately
grant full justice therein.

53. We shall have, moreover, the same respite and in
the same manner in rendering justice concerning the disafforestation or
retention of those forests which Henry our father and Richard our brother
afforested, and concerning the wardship of lands which are of the fief of
another (namely, such wardships as we have hitherto had by reason of a fief
which anyone held of us by knight’s service), and concerning abbeys founded on
other fiefs than our own, in which the lord of the fee claims to have right; and
when we have returned, or if we desist from our expedition, we will immediately
grant full justice to all who complain of such things.

54. No one shall be arrested or imprisoned upon the
appeal of a woman, for the death of any other than her husband.

55. All fines made with us unjustly and against the law
of the land, and all amercements, imposed unjustly and against the law of the
land, shall be entirely remitted, or else it shall be done concerning them
according to the decision of the five and twenty barons whom mention is made
below in the clause for securing the pease, or according to the judgment of the
majority of the same, along with the aforesaid Stephen, archbishop of
Canterbury, if he can be present, and such others as he may wish to bring with
him for this purpose, and if he cannot be present the business shall
nevertheless proceed without him, provided always that if any one or more of the
aforesaid five and twenty barons are in a similar suit, they shall be removed as
far as concerns this particular judgment, others being substituted in their
places after having been selected by the rest of the same five and twenty for
this purpose only, and after having been sworn.

56. If we have disseised or removed Welshmen from lands
or liberties, or other things, without the legal judgment of their peers in
England or in Wales, they shall be immediately restored to them; and if a
dispute arise over this, then let it be decided in the marches by the judgment
of their peers; for the tenements in England according to the law of England,
for tenements in Wales according to the law of Wales, and for tenements in the
marches according to the law of the marches. Welshmen shall do the same to us
and ours.

57. Further, for all those possessions from which any
Welshman has, without the lawful judgment of his peers, been disseised or
removed by King Henry our father, or King Richard our brother, and which we
retain in our hand (or which are possessed by others, and which we ought to
warrant), we will have respite until the usual term of crusaders; excepting
those things about which a plea has been raised or an inquest made by our order
before we took the cross; but as soon as we return (or if perchance we desist
from our expedition), we will immediately grant full justice in accordance with
the laws of the Welsh and in relation to the foresaid regions.

58. We will immediately give up the son of Llywelyn and
all the hostages of Wales, and the charters delivered to us as security for the
peace.

59. We will do towards Alexander, king
of Scots, concerning the return of his sisters and his hostages, and concerning
his franchises, and his right, in the same manner as we shall do towards our
owher barons of England, unless it ought to be otherwise according to the
charters which we hold from William his father, formerly king
of Scots; and this shall be according to the judgment of his peers in our court.

60. Moreover, all these aforesaid customs and
liberties, the observances of which we have granted in our kingdom as far as
pertains to us towards our men, shall be observed by all of our kingdom, as well
clergy as laymen, as far as pertains to them towards their men.

61. Since, moveover, for God and the amendment of our
kingdom and for the better allaying of the quarrel that has arisen between us
and our barons, we have granted all these concessions, desirous that they should
enjoy them in complete and firm endurance forever, we give and grant to them the
underwritten security, namely, that the barons choose five and twenty barons of
the kingdom, whomsoever they will, who shall be bound with all their might, to
observe and hold, and cause to be observed, the peace and liberties we have
granted and confirmed to them by this our present Charter, so that if we, or our
justiciar, or our bailiffs or any one of our officers, shall in anything be at
fault towards anyone, or shall have broken any one of the articles of this peace
or of this security, and the offense be notified to four barons of the foresaid
five and twenty, the said four barons shall repair to us (or our justiciar, if
we are out of the realm) and, laying the transgression before us, petition to
have that transgression redressed without delay. And if we shall not have
corrected the transgression (or, in the event of our being out of the realm, if
our justiciar shall not have corrected it) within forty days, reckoning from the
time it has been intimated to us (or to our justiciar, if we should be out of
the realm), the four barons aforesaid shall refer that matter to the rest of the
five and twenty barons, and those five and twenty barons shall, together with
the community of the whole realm, distrain and distress us in all possible ways,
namely, by seizing our castles, lands, possessions, and in any other way they
can, until redress has been obtained as they deem fit, saving harmless our own
person, and the persons of our queen and children; and when redress has been
obtained, they shall resume their old relations towards us. And let whoever in
the country desires it, swear to obey the orders of the said five and twenty
barons for the execution of all the aforesaid matters, and along with them, to
molest us to the utmost of his power; and we publicly and freely grant leave to
everyone who wishes to swear, and we shall never forbid anyone to swear. All
those, moveover, in the land who of themselves and of their own accord are
unwilling to swear to the twenty five to help them in constraining and molesting
us, we shall by our command compel the same to swear to the effect foresaid. And
if any one of the five and twenty barons shall have died or departed from the
land, or be incapacitated in any other manner which would prevent the foresaid
provisions being carried out, those of the said twenty five barons who are left
shall choose another in his place according to their own judgment, and he shall
be sworn in the same way as the others. Further, in all matters, the execution
of which is entrusted,to these twenty five barons, if perchance these twenty
five are present and disagree about anything, or if some of them, after being
summoned, are unwilling or unable to be present, that which the majority of
those present ordain or command shall be held as fixed and established, exactly
as if the whole twenty five had concurred in this; and the said twenty five
shall swear that they will faithfully observe all that is aforesaid, and cause
it to be observed with all their might. And we shall procure nothing from
anyone, directly or indirectly, whereby any part of these concessions and
liberties might be revoked or diminished; and if any such things has been
procured, let it be void and null, and we shall never use it personally or by
another.

62. And all the will, hatreds, and bitterness that have
arisen between us and our men, clergy and lay, from the date of the quarrel, we
have completely remitted and pardoned to everyone. Moreover, all trespasses
occasioned by the said quarrel, from Easter in the sixteenth year of our reign
till the restoration of peace, we have fully remitted to all, both clergy and
laymen, and completely forgiven, as far as pertains to us. And on this head, we
have caused to be made for them letters testimonial patent of the lord Stephen, archbishop of Canterbury, of the lord Henry, archbishop of Dublin, of the bishops aforesaid, and of
Master Pandulf as touching this security and the concessions
aforesaid.

63. Wherefore we will and firmly order that the English
Church be free, and that the men in our kingdom have and hold all the aforesaid
liberties, rights, and concessions, well and peaceably, freely and quietly,
fully and wholly, for themselves and their heirs, of us and our heirs, in all
respects and in all places forever, as is aforesaid. An oath, moreover, has been
taken, as well on our part as on the part of the barons, that all these
conditions aforesaid shall be kept in good faith and without evil intent. Given
under our hand – the above named and many others being witnesses – in the meadow
which is called Runnymede, between Windsor and Staines, on the fifteenth day of
June, in the seventeenth year of our reign.

 

magframe.asp

Now go to 10.10 on this video and listen to the “great Obama” speak so glowingly about this document and about the law built up by this so called Great Britain. Go on guys – it’s first day at school. Do yourself a favour and educate yourself before bashing down doors in your ignorance of what anything and everything is about. Or am I right? You just say to your masters “Yes sir no sir three bags full sir”?

While note at the beginning of the video, the BBC gives us a shot of the Chief Rabbi (now a member of the House of Lords). Not the head of the Anglican church or Christian faith but of the Jewish faith. Yet, it would seem, that Obama’s commentary regarding the wonderful document of the Magna Carta doesn’t offend the Rabbi. Strange old world isn’t it?

You want respect? EARN IT!

But don’t go getting into any heated debates now will you? You might just find a bunch of heavies at your door treating you like some form of terrorist!