Earthlinggb's Blog

The Jew Bank of England

Posted in Finance, Money, Political History by Earthlinggb . on April 5, 2014

jbs 1jbs 2

jbs 3 jbs 4 jbs 5 jbs 6 jbs 7 jbs 8 jbs 9 jbs 10 jbs 11 jbs 12 jbs 13 jbs 14 jbs 15 jbs 16 jbs 17 jbs 18 jbs 19 jbs 20 jbs 21 jbs 22

jbs 23 jbs 24 jbs 25 jbs 26 jbs 27 jbs 28 jbs 29 jbs 30 jbs 31 jbs 32

Jewkraine 2: Use Ukrainium!

Posted in Law, Politics by Earthlinggb . on March 3, 2014

For god’s sakes Ukraine – USE YOUR HEID!

I’ve just written “Jewkraine” the other day and now a couple of days later, what do we see transpiring? A self proclaimed government installing jewish oligarchs into positions of power.

Ihor Valeriyovych Kolomoyskyi (Ukrainian: Ігор Валерійович Коломойський; Russian: Игорь Валерьевич Коломойский, Igor Kolomoisky; born February 13, 1963) is an Ukrainian-Israeli business oligarch of Jewish descent. Kolomoysky has a dual Ukrainian-Israeli citizenship although dual citizenship is not recognized by Ukraine and controls his business empire from Switzerland.

Ihor

The fact his Israeli citizenship is not even recognised in the Ukraine has him breaking the law! But then what do you expect Ukraine? You want to join the EU and be friends with the biggest criminals going like the British government and Barry Obama who’s a Kenyan in charge of the Whitehouse, contrary to the constitution of the United States of America (the REAL America that is NOT the U.S. Corporation version). So don’t be surprised when they allow a jew to take the piss out of YOUR constitution to ensure they get their people in power in Ukraine!

But I have to ask you – Do you like sleepwalking? Because that’s what you’re doing! Half of you wanting to cling to the shirt-tail of one corrupt criminal establishment on the east and the other half of you wanting to join the western mafia! Don’t you read? I guess not, not many people do over here either. But if you DO read this, let me tell you, this thing you’re thinking of embracing called “democracy” (or at least the western version of it) is a joke! “Out of the frying pan into the fire” comes to mind!

But, that aside, WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU DOING ALLOWING THE BLOODY JEWS/ZIONISTS TO TAKE OVER YOUR COUNTRY? 0.5% of your 70 million population are jewish and here we are again. The virus starts to eat the host once more and the host embraces it! It’s like the virgin who can’t stop herself from allowing Dracula in through her window!

3:4 jews

 

And the fourth one, Sergey Taruta, has bowed to the zionist/west influence and supports the EU/IMF takeover entirely.

RT 1

RT 2

 

You know? I’m a scot and I look at my own country about to go to polls and THINK they’re doing something incredible – they’re doing jack shit with their referendum but trying to tell them that – no chance. They are so up their own arses thinking they really can tell Westminster to go to hell (and they can and it makes no bloody difference in the scheme of things whatsoever- ah but they have “Bannockburn” in their veins! Assholes) – when they are going to achieve NOTHING because it is all so controlled from top down but the idiots can’t see it. They won’t ALLOW themselves to see it. And yet, I just watched a video made of your (Ukraine’s) “Orange Revolution from 2004/2005 and I bloody cried! I cried with the frustration of seeing millions of people being divided by two opposite forces who WANT and NEED you to be divided – just as they do here between Scotland and England – and knowing that, if you could only see the reality and drop the division based upon “Russia or the West” and WORK on a UKRAINIAN CONSTITUTION AND MONETARY SYSTEM based upon ALL of your wishes (non divisive), then you’d have the Ukraine you want, just as Scotland COULD have the Scotland it wants!

The video: An interesting watch. So you went to all that bother and then it all fucked up and do you know why? Because you still did not deal with the Constitutional issues of your country and left it up to the politicians again! When are you all going to learn you can leave NOTHING to politicians because, one way or another, by some faction or other, east or west, they are all bought and paid for!

EVERY SINGLE COUNTRY DOES EXACTLY THE SAME THING: THEY DIVIDE THEMSELVES BY SIDING WITH ONE GUY/PARTY OR THE OTHER. THEY THROW GARBAGE AT EACH OTHER PROMOTING AND SUPPORTING TWO GUYS WHO DON’T GIVE A SHIT ABOUT EITHER OF THEM INSTEAD OF BOTH PEOPLES, ON OPPOSITE SIDES (SO THEY THINK BECAUSE THEY’RE LED TO BELIEVE THAT) SITTING DOWN AND TALKING – NOT OF THE TWO PERSONALITIES THEY ARE EACH SUPPORTING, BUT WHAT THEY, THEMSELVES, WANT. THEY DON’T DO THAT BECAUSE THE VAST MAJORITY OF PEOPLE DON’T THINK THEY CAN DO THAT BECAUSE THEY HAVE BEEN LED TO BELIEVE “IT’S TOO COMPLEX FOR YOU” AND YET THE BRITISH GOVERNMENT HAVE A CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER WHO’S LAST JOB, BEFORE POLITICS, WAS AS A TOWEL FOLDER IN SELFRIDGES! THINK ABOUT IT!

DON’T MAKE THAT “GRASS ROOTS” THING ABOUT ANY SINGLE PARTY OR INDIVIDUAL. MAKE IT ALL ABOUT YOU SITTING DOWN TOGETHER AND WORKING ON YOUR IDEAS OF A CONSTITUTIONAL LAW! ONLY THEN WILL YOU ACTUALLY BE IN CHARGE AND CREATE REAL CHANGE!

But YOU, Ukraine, are so much closer to being able to achieve that because you, at least, are strong enough to take the actions you did in 2004. Scots and British don’t have that strength of resolve. YOU also know how the corruption is at work in your country. The majority of Brits can’t really grasp it. They’re too thick!

YOU could cause the west AND the east BIG problems if you took the power into your own hands and said “We want neither of you!” Look at Kolomoyskyi’s HQ. It’s Switzerland! Why? Why do you think that is? Well your oligarchs’ masters reside there. Right bang in the middle of the EU and yet not part of the EU, while the Zionist Congress (and the Bank of International Settlements) reside there and Adolf Hitler simply turned around when he got to the border because the Swiss had sings up at the border saying “No entry, we’re neutral”. Well, if the Swiss can hold back the, so called, wildest, psychopathic dictator on planet earth at the time, I’m sure you can too. They didn’t even have tanks! Strange that isn’t it?

Talking about Tanks and personnel. Here’s another funny thing…..

Here’s how things stack up, according to the BBC, in terms of the relative Armed forces of the two countries:

Russia v Ukraine

 

Looks like you could be in a little bit of a pickle Ukraine IF it got to fisticuffs. However, maybe not. After all, you could always take a leaf or three out of Afghanistan’s books couldn’t you? Have you got any goats in Ukraine? Not too many mountains I guess though?

Russia v Afghanistan

 

 

 

 

Here is Sergey Taruta seated on the left with fellow ‘Ukrainian’ jew criminal Victor Pinchuk seated on right at 2013 Davos “Ukraine: East or West” conference.

_4IL1096

 

Now, if you’ve heard of the Council For Foreign Relations (CFR) including its European CFR counterpart and the RIIA (Chatham House) in the UK, you just might be interested in reading what they are shit scared of.

Here it is:

Ukraine’s Orange Revolution: Film Screening and Discussion

Speakers: Steve York, Documentary Film Director And Producer, Peter Ackerman, Founding Chair, International Center On Nonviolent Conflict, and David Kramer, Senior Transatlantic Fellow, German Marshall Fund Of The United States
Presider: Robert McMahon, Editor, Cfr.Org
December 1, 2009, Washington D.C.
Council on Foreign Relations

ACKERMAN: I think there’s a couple of comments: It’s the color revolution that are worth noting. The color revolutions are a subset of what we call civil resistance or nonviolent conflict. That’s defined as to what people do when they’re living under some form of oppression, but have no military option that’s viable. So they recognize the status quo can’t stand, so they use strikes, boycotts, mass protests. There’s literally hundreds of ways civil society can pressure the status quo.

The point of these acts of pressure — and you see this very clearly in the movie — is to force movement of members of the pillars of support that exist on the other side. It’s quite clear, for example, the Supreme Court would not have behaved the way it did if had not become clear that the police were not going to disperse these crowds.

So we all see — we see in this movie, that happened so many other times, loyalty shifts amongst the security services. This happened in the People Power Movement in the Philippines. It happened in South Africa; it happened in the case of Pinochet in the end. It certainly happened if you see the movie we did on the fall of Milosevic, where one day — contrary to everyone’s expectation — he announced, well, gee. I want to step down now and spend more time with my grandson. Now, this is a man which everybody believed would never fall without a great fight. And frankly, what was happened is that the pillars underneath him were completely shaken — particularly the military.

So I think we need to look at what civil resistance is and what works and what doesn’t work. And what we do see is that it’s the disruption that’s critical, and that gets to another point which you’ve seen here. And this is — I think we’ve now told how many stories? We’ve told eight stories in three movies we’ve done — is you see one kind of tactic that’s use that seems to predominate and that’s the street protest. But if you look, for example, the way Gandhi worked. For him, it was a disobedience with respect to making salt. Or you look in South Africa it was the consumer boycotts that were critical; you tell a story of the national lunch counter boycotts that were led by Jim Lawson, who was the most important strategist during the civil rights movement.

So there’s a wide variety of tactics that can roughly be separated into two parts: acts of commission and acts of omission. Acts of commission, like street protests, are things you do that the other side wants you to stop doing. And then there’s acts of omission that you stop doing things that the regime needs you to do. In both cases, you’re playing against the dependency the other side has on your cooperation.

Now, we did a study last year that appeared in International Security Quarterly that looked at 320 insurrections that occurred from 1900 till the present day — till last year. And of those insurrections, two-thirds were violent in character — basically, a small group of insurrectionists were in operation to try to effect change. And the other third were civil resistance movements where the primary tactics were maintain nonviolent discipline.

The data’s quite interesting. Twenty-six percent of the violent insurrections turned out to be successful while 53 percent of the civil resistance movements turned out to be successful. And the point about this is that when you’re in civil society and you’re disrupting, there’s very little — the counteract can’t be pure annihilation, because the government wants your cooperation to create a tranquil society again. In the case of a violent insurrection, the response is to annihilate the small group of violent insurrectionists.

So you have in a civil resistance movement a great deal of staying power. And that’s the way I think we have to view Iran. Iran — the Iranian movement can learn many things from this movement or what happened with Pinochet or what happened in South Africa. And what is becoming clear is that we’re in — we might very well be in the first phases of that learning and basically taking the lessons of these movements and repotting the efforts at disruptions.

So the key for us and the reason we do these movies is to say: Are there lessons, strategic principles, that we see in these movies that basically are applicable to others? For sure, in every one of these cases, you have culturally specific, demographically specific, ethnically specific, religiously specific circumstances. But when you step back and you say, what of the common elements and you study those, the people who come to us for help realize that they can start to reverse engineer those principles to be effective in their own context.

 

NOTE: “53 percent of civil resistance movements turned out to be successful.” They then go on to make it clear that they assess everything and then use it to THEIR advantage! They “reverse engineer” it all so that they can use the propaganda that worked FOR you previously, AGAINST you! Also notice that violence is EASY for them to deal with because it gives them the excuse to move in with Police and Army and quell such actions “for the good of the country and people’s lives”.

IF, however, you as a non divided people (they LOVE division – they exist because of it), go into passive resistance mode and non violent insurrection, they don’t have a leg to stand on. They are impotent to do anything because to take any form of authoritarian action with Police or Military shooting, the rest of the world (and the rest of the country) then see what they are and they cannot have that. THEY NEED YOUR DIVISION!

Beautiful jews and UN news!

Posted in "Climate Change", Law, Politics, The Corrupt SOB's, Uncategorized by Earthlinggb . on February 3, 2014

I am attacked continuously for being “Anti semite”.

People read but do not interpret the words properly.

People are so used to simply reading or hearing a few words which they then focus on and remove from all context. It is the world of soundbites.

People read and hear then interpret, not what is actually being said but what they wish to interpret.

I have literally been face to face with people who have simply closed down and refuse to listen or discuss and communicate to try and reach a conclusion where they would then actually understand what is meant rather than what they wish to interpret. I have been the victim of police/judiciary action specifically because of this. Even the latter don’t listen. They interpret a statute and simply apply it because “that is what it says” and “from what you said and wrote, directly contravenes that statute or our interpretation of what you said and wrote while we actually do not fully appreciate the broader issues we just concentrate on the narrow focus of what the statute says and what you have written”.

So then, I ask myself: If I AM an “Anti semite” then how can I call this group of people in the video beautiful? They’re jews. They proclaim their identity as such. They are proud of their jewish roots. I realise every religion on earth is man made and a manipulation tool but I also recognise the majority do not even though it is quite obvious. As the lad says in the video “circles” and he is told to put his “circle” (the jewish circle) above all others  and he RECOGNISES the fundamental racism in this. Religions are entirely for the purpose of creating the world we have full of a single human race who are separated into factions like a Venn diagram. Each subset seeing itself as a “race” and the barriers are already set in place. Religion IS racism at its core and it has been, is and may always be a wonderful tool of those who are within  not the 1% but the 0,01%.

But, whether I recognise this or not and those who follow their religions don’t, I can still see and appreciate beautiful people of whatever “race”, nationality or religion because they simply have humanity.

These young jews see the issue. They even recognise why jews have been persecuted over so many centuries and they recognise the “jewish” (I would like to show them why this “jewish” lot within the 1% and 0.01% are not jewish) influence within Banking and Corporate worlds. AND they are speaking out against it. They see how this money is being ploughed into the deaths and oppression of so many not only in Palestine but in Iraq, Afghanistan and anywhere else that does not play the globalist game and who wish to maintain their sovereignty.

Anyone can be evil no matter what “race” or religion they proclaim to be. The issue with the jewish “race” is that their religious teachings have been used, abused and hijacked but zionism and freemasonry. The zionist (Rothschild zionist) element have then used jews (the holocaust story while the zionists had every opportunity to transfer jews from danger – read the Transfer agreement) to enable and strengthen their “hand” and their calls for a jewish only state. They used Jewish blood to do this and they did it purposefully. Yet it is Aipac, JDL, ADL etc who proclaim the horrors of those events where jews have been persecuted yet, throughout, it has been a tiny group of wealthy and powerful men who have murdered jews to achieve their aims. These powerful individuals then setting up these Zionist organisations and brainwashing jews into believing zionism is just the wish for a jewish homeland (when, strangely, any and all other peoples who would demand such would be considered xenophobic racists).

Basically, it has been a mindfcuk. Exceptionally well orchestrated but so many jews believe in the ideology OR they have been bribed by being part of the “chosen people” who have such massive control of the entire world’s wealth through money manipulation. These young jews even refer to this and can see it.

But as there is a jewish circle, there is a circle above that which is zionist (the NWO agenda zionists motivated by money, power and greed) and above that there is a “Catholic or Jesuit” circle. There are many circles and it is the destruction of ALL circles (the Venn diagram subsets) which is needed.

If the wish for no circles, no “races” and no manipulated, state/UN controlled religion while wishing to bring an end to the LEGAL control of the world’s population through birth registration to an authoritarian state apparatus and bringing an end to the manipulation of money and the corruption of law through legislation of victimless “crimes” is anti semitic, then YES, I AM anti semtitic.

However, I can’t see how it is possible for an anti semite to literally find a lump in his throat while watching and listening to beautiful people who happen to be jewish!

So I simply wish to express my thanks to these young jews because I have children whom I do not wish to inherit a world which is becoming (and is) controlled by a very few psychopathic despots following some form of “code” which is written within Babylonian/Judaic texts. When I see and hear such from young jews, it makes everything seem so much brighter looking to the future. This “chosen ones” ideology needs to be destroyed because it is the precise equivalent of the Nazi ideology of the “Master race” – the terms mean one and the same thing.

Zionism and all circles require destruction. To do so, we need to focus on those in that 0.01% who have constructed them and maintain them. It IS a “war” and it is a real one – very much so. In fact, it has been the entire war for decades/centuries and winning it means peace. Globally. I don’t advocate violence (but then neither does the UN or any state at face value do they? but then they bomb the living daylights out of anyone in their way) because knowledge and education can achieve the same ends (and why they don’t wish for the money to go to such uses). There IS the need, however, to put the true criminals in jail for various forms of crime on humanity.

Now HERE is where I will lose some people:

The UN is a PRIME criminal organisation within the entire global scheme of things. The ironic thing is that they display it openly but people just do not wish to see it.

“What a ridiculous thing to suggest!” I can hear so many people state. Yes it appears to be doesn’t it? After all, UN Declaration of Human Rights and all that. :-)

Ok, let’s look at the first 3 articles of that declaration:

Article 1.

  • All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.

Article 2.

  • Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.

Article 3.

  • Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.

Sounds good doesn’t it? Ah! But wait a second. There is a HUGE, MASSIVE, in fact IMMENSE contradiction in it.

“All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.” Question: Do you wish to disagree with this statement?

No, I didn’t think so.

So then what about this.

“Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration.”

Question: Do you see the problem? It is staring you right in the face!

Let’s return to Thomas Paine for a moment from another blogpost:

Human rights originate in Nature, thus, rights cannot be granted via political charter, because that implies that rights are legally revocable, hence, would be privileges:

It is a perversion of terms to say that a charter gives rights. It operates by a contrary effect — that of taking rights away. Rights are inherently in all the inhabitants; but charters, by annulling those rights, in the majority, leave the right, by exclusion, in the hands of a few… They… consequently are instruments of injustice.

Question: What is the UN Articles of Human Rights?

Answer: It is a POLITICAL CHARTER and a LEGAL DOCUMENT.

While the charter states, absolutely factually, that every person is born FREE and EQUAL, it then goes on to entirely contradict this very concept by stating “everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this declaration”.

Now, there are many issues with this which I sincerely hope the reader can see quite clearly.

IF people are BORN “free and equal” (which we are and I challenge anyone to disagree with such) then they are free and equal. End of story. Being free and equal MEANS that NOONE may infringe your “god given” human rights. What obviously follows from this, then, is that, just as noone can infringe your rights, noone has the authority over another to abridge them, to reduce them or even to state what your rights are! But this is precisely what the UN has done in their declaration. They state, effectively, that these are the rights, ACCORDING TO THEM, that you are allowed. Individual states then enact these rights to varying degrees, within their own state LEGISLATION (more legality). Every single time “rights” are written within legal parameters, they are diluted and from the very day the UN Articles were written, they diluted your “rights” within the global LEGAL system.

IF you are born FREE and EQUAL then I am afraid that IF the UN and the State is serious in its proclamation of such, then YOU have every right to say “Thanks but no thanks” to their “offer” of “protection” for, as a FREE and EQUAL man or woman, you may contract with whatever INDIVIDUAL or ORGANISATION you wish. If you are effectively stopped from making such a FREE and EQUAL decision (and remember the UN, as with ALL organisations, is composed of OTHER “FREE and EQUAL” individuals) then your rights are, in fact, being impinged upon. There is no two ways about this.

Now, the number of “rights” the UN provides you (“provides you”? HOW can they PROVIDE rights when you are already born absolutely FREE and EQUAL? This is the equivalent of a magician’s slight of hand trick) are limited. Forgive me for the following but it is for the purposes of demonstrating something:

Does the UN Articles articulate in any way that you have the right to fart on a public street? OR, what if you are standing in a queue in a bank and you’ve just had a chilli con carne? What if the bank wishes to pass a bye law for it’s own PRIVATE premises that NOONE may fart on its premises? Does the UN declaration state that everyone has the right to fart (a natural human process) wherever and whenever they wish? No, it doesn’t. So, the point is, what is stopping ANY organisation or group of people (even the state) from imposing a statutory act that states “No smoking and no farting in licensed premises”?

Yes, it’s a silly example but it is meant to be. The point is that the declaration is stating “these are your rights and that is it”. No no no. If you accept this then you accept your rights being removed.

THE SUBROGATION OF YOUR “GOD GIVEN” HUMAN RIGHTS TO THE STATE IS A FUNCTION OF YOUR BIRTH REGISTRATION. YOU MUST UNDERSTAND THIS! See the blogpost entitled “UN inadvertently confirms freeman concept”.

Now what about the third article?

“Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person”.

ANOTHER interesting statement and concept from the UN so let’s look at that more closely:

Article 6 (Survival and development): Children have the right to live. Governments should ensure that children survive and develop healthily.

Now ignoring for a moment that this makes me laugh from the perspective that it is like saying “Children have the right to live but adults don’t”, there is something just as astounding. That is the following:

The September 2001 attacks signalled the only occasion in NATO’s history that Article 5 of the NATO treaty has been invoked and consequently the 11 September attacks were deemed to be an attack on all nineteen NATO members. After 11 September, troops were deployed to Afghanistan under the NATO-led ISAF and the organization continues to operate in a range of roles sending trainers to Iraq, assisting in counter-piracy operations and most recently enforced a NATO-led no-fly zone over Libya in 2011 in accordance with UN SC Resolution 1973.

The Berlin Plus agreement is a comprehensive package of agreements made between NATO and the European Union on 16 December 2002. With this agreement the EU was given the possibility to use NATO assets in case it wanted to act independently in an international crisis, on the condition that NATO itself did not want to act—the so-called “right of first refusal”. There are currently 28 member states of NATO, with the most recent being Albania and Croatia who joined in April 2009. The combined military spending of all NATO members constitutes over 70% of the world’s defence spending. The United States alone accounts for 43% of the total military spending of the world and the United Kingdom, France, Germany, and Italy account for a further 15%.

Now, let’s put some perspective on this. 70% of the world’s defence spending is borne by the US, UK, France, Germany and Italy. These countries ALSO form the major founding nations within the UN and have the most voting shares. NATO, generally, finds its LEGALITY to interfere with any and all nations on the basis of UN resolutions. The following results from this interference:

The following is a transcript of a speech given by now 13-year-old Charlotte Aldebron at a peace rally in Maine.

When people think about bombing Iraq, they see a picture in their heads of Saddam Hussein in a military uniform, or maybe soldiers with big black mustaches carrying guns, or the mosaic of George Bush Senior on the lobby floor of the Al-Rashid Hotel with the word “criminal.” But guess what? More than half of Iraq’s 24 million people are children under the age of 15. That’s 12 million kids. Kids like me. Well, I’m almost 13, so some are a little older, and some a lot younger, some boys instead of girls, some with brown hair, not red. But kids who are pretty much like me just the same. So take a look at me—a good long look. Because I am what you should see in your head when you think about bombing Iraq. I am what you are going to destroy.

If I am lucky, I will be killed instantly, like the three hundred children murdered by your “smart” bombs in a Baghdad bomb shelter on February 16, 1991. The blast caused a fire so intense that it flash-burned outlines of those children and their mothers on the walls; you can still peel strips of blackened skin—souvenirs of your victory—from the stones.

But maybe I won’t be lucky and I’ll die slowly, like 14-year-old Ali Faisal, who right now is in the “death ward” of the Baghdad children’s hospital. He has malignant lymphoma—cancer—caused by the depleted uranium in your Gulf War missiles. Or maybe I will die painfully and needlessly like18-month-old Mustafa, whose vital organs are being devoured by sand fly parasites. I know it’s hard to believe, but Mustafa could be totally cured with just $25 worth of medicine, but there is none of this medicine because of your sanctions.

Or maybe I won’t die at all but will live for years with the psychological damage that you can’t see from the outside, like Salman Mohammed, who even now can’t forget the terror he lived through with his little sisters when you bombed Iraq in 1991. Salman’s father made the whole family sleep in the same room so that they would all survive together, or die together. He still has nightmares about the air raid sirens.

Or maybe I will be orphaned like Ali, who was three when you killed his father in the Gulf War. Ali scraped at the dirt covering his father’s grave every day for three years calling out to him, “It’s all right Daddy, you can come out now, the men who put you here have gone away.” Well, Ali, you’re wrong. It looks like those men are coming back.

Or I maybe I will make it in one piece, like Luay Majed, who remembers that the Gulf War meant he didn’t have to go to school and could stay up as late as he wanted. But today, with no education, he tries to live by selling newspapers on the street.

Imagine that these are your children—or nieces or nephews or neighbors. Imagine your son screaming from the agony of a severed limb, but you can’t do anything to ease the pain or comfort him. Imagine your daughter crying out from under the rubble of a collapsed building, but you can’t get to her. Imagine your children wandering the streets, hungry and alone, after having watched you die before their eyes.

This is not an adventure movie or a fantasy or a video game. This is reality for children in Iraq. Recently, an international group of researchers went to Iraq to find out how children there are being affected by the possibility of war. Half the children they talked to said they saw no point in living any more. Even really young kids knew about war and worried about it. One 5-year-old, Assem, described it as “guns and bombs and the air will be cold and hot and we will burn very much.” Ten-year-old Aesar had a message for President Bush: he wanted him to know that “A lot of Iraqi children will die. You will see it on TV and then you will regret.”

Back in elementary school I was taught to solve problems with other kids not by hitting or name-calling, but by talking and using “I” messages. The idea of an “I” message was to make the other person understand how bad his or her actions made you feel, so that the person would sympathize with you and stop it. Now I am going to give you an “I” message. Only it’s going to be a “We” message. “We” as in all the children in Iraq who are waiting helplessly for something bad to happen. “We” as in the children of the world who don’t make any of the decisions but have to suffer all the consequences. “We” as in those whose voices are too small and too far away to be heard.

We feel scared when we don’t know if we’ll live another day.

We feel angry when people want to kill us or injure us or steal our future.

We feel sad because all we want is a mom and a dad who we know will be there the next day.

And, finally, we feel confused—because we don’t even know what we did wrong.

Charlotte Aldebron, 13, attends Cunningham Middle School in Presque Isle, Maine. Comments may be sent to her mom, Jillian Aldebron at aldebron@ainop.com.

But then we’ll hear the UN, through UNICEF saying “But look what we do? Look what we ARE doing for the Iraqi mothers and children!”

And all I will say is this: Yes, AFTER you have killed their fathers and destroyed their families, their infrastructure, their way of life and are now ready to rebuild in YOUR image! Incorporate an Iraqi Central Bank and provide “loans” which are carrots with strings attached to indebt the nation, control its resources and infrastructure and make DAMNED SURE those Iraqi children have their births registered (forget so many will be born with cancers due to depleted uranium which the UN states is still legal!! FORGET THAT!) so that they can be “RECOGNISED IN LAW” just as the rest of the west is. The controlling mechanism by which you can then impose taxes and duties and have them subjugated to the legalities which YOU impose!

Your damned righteous, pius, hypocrisy makes me want to puke!

So WHERE is the rights of tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of children who have been MURDERED by the States, the governments who the UN states should ensure their survival and healthy development? The “right to life”? Within a legal document which also legitimizes the taking of life? The UN does not say SOME children have the right to life and that governments should ensure the survival of SOME. Neither does it say that it is ok to drop cluster bombs and tomahawk missiles and machine gun from helicopters  SOME children in the interests of saving more. It says ALL children. This is NOT a utilitarian world and neither does the UN articles suggest it SHOULD be. But the UN and the nations who compose the UN and NATO seem to think so!

So where were the rights of all these children murdered? Where were the rights of the thousands of palestinian children murdered by Israel in operation Cast Lead and others? Where are the warcrime tribunals for the Blairs and the Bush’s, Sarkozy’s etc etc? WHERE ARE THEY?

The answer? “Ah! But they’re OUR warcriminals! That’s the difference!”

But wait, didn’t you say that every child is born free and equal? Ah but then that is a pure lie UN because, as you say so very clearly, it is not until children are recognised LEGALLY, that, in fact, they do exist. And if they are not registered and have no birth certificate then they have no rights to ANY confered benefits by ANY state or government. So then they DO NOT, in your eyes, have any rights (privileges) from the moment they are born therefore, they are NOT born “free” until you bestow those rights upon them!

But then the “ying” of that “yang” is that you cannot control or tax them either if they are unregistered because they have not SUBROGATED their “god given” human rights to the legalities of which you promote. Once they do, you have them just where you want them!

One registers one’s car, one is the REGISTERED KEEPER but NOT owner. For if that car is your own private property then who (if you are free and equal) has the right to stop you from using it? But the DVLA does BECAUSE you have subrogated your ownership (rights) to your private property and may only use it under strict licence conditions.

One registers their child’s birth, one is then subrogating one’s authority (not responsibility however) to one’s child. You are transfering the legal “ownership” of your child to the state. The state, then, if it so desires, may take your child from you and this is NOT always because you are a bad parent but because you may just be an irritant to the state in one form or another. However, the bottom line is that IF we are all free and equal then NOONE, no individual or state or organisation has ANY right to remove your child. But they do because you CONTRACTED with them by registering your child. You have (ignorantly but through your ignorance, under no coercion) entered a LEGAL agreement with the state where you have transfered such inexhaustive rights to them AND they have handed you a legal document called a Human Rights Act, in place of your natural born rights. It’s brilliant and effective but it is a con and it is a crime on humanity because while they pretend it provides you with rights (and it does to a very small degree in comparison to the inexhaustive rights you were born with), it ensures that your entire life can be controlled from birth to death.

More Childs Rights:

Article 7 (Registration, name, nationality, care): All children have the right to a legally registered name, officially recognised by the government. Children have the right to a nationality (to belong to a country).

Question: Do they also have the right to forego a legally registered name officially recognised by the government state? And do they have the right to forego a nationality and retain their free, sovereign, human rights undiluted by the UN articles? When they do, the UN and the state then say they do not exist legally and therefore they are not “qualified” for any protection. They have no rights to freedom of movement around the world (no passport), they will not be allowed to find a job (oh dear! The state then won’t be able to tax anyone if everyone can’t find a job because everyone decides that they wish to utilise that freedom and equality to NOT register). So UN, all I am askng is: Are we free? :-) Not until you tell us we are right?

Article 8 (Preservation of identity): Children have the right to an identity – an official record of who they are. Governments should respect children’s right to a name, a nationality and family ties.

I had and have an identity. I had one even before my parents registered me. I was their child and they gave me a name which they then simply believed they were making a record of when registering. They did not know they were subrogating my rights and providing me with a “monopoly piece” called a birth certificate which only then would allow me to buy and sell and contract – oh! And I forgot, also made me vulnerable to going to jail for a victimless “crime” based upon state legislation AND had me liable to immense increases in taxation to pay off a national debt that doesn’t need to exist if the state did not borrow its currency but simply issued it. Neither would I then have the PM state that I am liable for bailing out the banks and having then to endure austerity measures while these criminals were paid off, destroying my career, pension, savings etc. No I wasn’t told that and neither were my parents. I would guess, then, that that constitutes a case of non full disclosure of the contract set up BY the birth certificate. Doesn’t the “law” state that, in the case of one party to a contract not giving full disclosure then the contract is null and void? Yes, I think it does. Cheerio government. Knock on my door and you can respectfully fcuk off. Our contract is null and void!

Article 41 (Respect for superior national standards):

If the laws of a country provide better protection of children’s rights than the articles in this Convention, those laws should apply.

Interesting. WHO decides this? The state? or the UN? If either one of them then it surely would be that either party will vote for itself. If not decided by either of them then by whom? Whoever it is that decides however, is that not a decision for the party who may be affected by it? That would be the child (or possibly the parent) would it not? If you are suggesting some individual or some organisation other than the child or it’s parent makes that decision then you are stating that we are not all free and equal are you not? Or is it just some are more free and equal than others?

Article 24 (Health and health services):

Children have the right to good quality health care – the best health care possible – to safe drinking water, nutritious food, a clean and safe environment, and information to help them stay healthy. Rich countries should help poorer countries achieve this.

Tell that to NATO and the major UN nations who control it.

After all of that UN – TAKE A LOOK IN THE MIRROR AND RECOGNISE YOU OUTSTANDING HYPOCRISY.

But then who controls you?

Oh yes, I forgot. This guy and his ilk:

Article 6.

  • Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law.

Yes indeed. YOUR “law”. It’s so wonderful that you want the 50M children each year who are unregistered to be registered. And it is so wonderful that you had 750,000 children in Afghanistan given vaccines while, at the same time, you had administrators, attending along with the medical staff, to register these children.

Isn’t it a coincidence, then, that David Rockefeller makes the fiollowing speech regarding his concern about the world’s population growth and overconsumption and prospects of a decent life on this planet (for who?) within a UN speech he gave:

Isn’t it also then, a coincidence that Rockefeller, within this speech, also referred to the Earth Summit in Rio in 1992 which promoted the entire Climate Change. Sustainability agenda as proposed by the Club of Rome originally in their publication in 1972 called “limits to growth” which was then followed up in 1993 when they published “The first Global Revolution”? Obviously being written before and during the year of the Earth summit then released as a “guidance”.

The United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED), also known as the Rio Summit, Rio Conference, Earth Summit (Portuguese: Eco ’92) was a major United Nations conference held in Rio de Janeiro from 3 June to 14 June 1992.

Why is that all a coincidence? Well, because:

The Club of Rome is a global think tank that deals with a variety of international political issues. Founded in 1968 at David Rockefeller’s estate in Bellagio, Italy, the CoR describes itself as “a group of world citizens, sharing a common concern for the future of humanity.” It consists of current and former Heads of State, UN bureaucrats, high-level politicians and government officials, diplomats, scientists, economists, and business leaders from around the globe. It raised considerable public attention in 1972 with its report The Limits to Growth. The club states that its mission is “to act as a global catalyst for change through the identification and analysis of the crucial problems facing humanity and the communication of such problems to the most important public and private decision makers as well as to the general public.”

Well well well, there’s old Rockefeller’s name again! But there’s more because:

In 1993, the Club published The First Global Revolution. According to this book, divided nations require common enemies to unite them, “either a real one or else one invented for the purpose.” Because of the sudden absence of traditional enemies, “new enemies must be identified.” “In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill….All these dangers are caused by human intervention, and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy then, is humanity itself.”

But then there’s even more:

Rockefellers’ 1Sky Unveils the New 350.org: More $ — More Delusion

World’s Greatest Magic Trick “If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.” – George Orwell On 6 April 2011 it was announced that the RINGO (Rockefeller initiated NGO) 1Sky and their sister organization 350.org have ‘officially merged’ into one mass climate movement – the ‘NEW’ 350.org.
Let the Vatican preach, hallefuckinglujah, as we double-up on the soma followed by a double shot of absinthe burning like the embers of hell. Thank you Rockefellers, Clintons, McKibben and friends. Make way for the onslaught of illusion in which green capitalism and false solutions will somehow save us. In one last final performance – the elites will now perform their final magical act that defies all logic. Drum roll please … ladies and gentleman … we will now embrace the same system which is systematically destroying us – splash it with a green patina … and now … this same system will magically save us. Justice for all! The illuminated signs flash toward the audience … applause! applause! applause! Follow the Money
An example of what two prominent environmental groups, 1Sky and 350.org, receive from the Rockefeller foundations alone:
Step it Up and 350.org (Sustainable Markets Foundation)
·         $100,000 for 1 year awarded on March 13, 2008 to support its project, Step it Up’s new initiative called Project 350 ·         40,000 2008 Rockefeller Family Fund (RFF) for Sustainable Markets Foundation | 350.org ·         $100,000 for 1 year awarded on March 3, 2009 for its Project 350 ·         $200,000 for 1 year awarded on March 12, 2009 for its climate accountability project, The Sustainable Market Foundation ·         $75,000 for 1 year  awarded on November 7, 2009 for its project 350.org ·         $25,000 for 1 year awarded on March 22, 2010 for its Eco-Accountability project ·         $100,000 for 1 year awarded on June 17, 2010 for its 350.orgproject

1Sky Education Fund

·         $1,000,000 for 2 years awarded on December 13, 2007 ·         $20,000 for 1 year awarded on November 17, 2008 for an alignment meeting of U.S. climate change leaders ·         200,000 2008 RFF ·         45,000 2008 RFF ·         $250,000 for 1 year awarded on June 18, 2009 ·         $30,000 for 1 year awarded on April 9, 2009 to support a consultant to coordinate the alignment of U.S. climate change leaders and large grassroots organizations ·         $250,000 for 1 year awarded on November 2, 2009 ·         $250,000 for 1 year awarded on November 19, 2009 ·         50,000 2009 RFF ·         15,000 2009 RFF ·         20,000 2009 RFF

350.org: The Environmental and sustainability group who are “Anti” Big oil and big business. FUNDED by the scions of Big Oil and Big Business, the Rockefeller Foundation! (Standard Oil/ENRON) How ABSOLUTELY bizarre! Until you understand the agenda!

The Climate change scam, brought to you by the very same scam artists who crashed the world’s economy, own the central banking system, loan all governments their currency, own and control the IMF, the UN, the world’s largest investment banks, the major oil and gas corporations, big pharma (vaccines) and much anything else you can imagine. While they fund organisations proclaiming to be anti capitalist and anti big business and while the Occupy movement is filled with the Environmental “Greenies” who are completely oblivious to facts and wish to remain so:

THESIS and ANTITHESIS: WORKS EVERYTIME! :-)

But there’s even more:

Investment banker speaking about the amount of tax which could be imposed upon the world’s population to “fight” this “invented for the purpose” SCAM called Climate change, before he then introduces the one and only DAVID DE ROTHSCHILD – the “Jesus” of Climate Change while part of the other and more massively wealthy through banking and big business families.

HOW EXTRAORDINARILY BIZARRE!

But AGAIN, there’s more:

Al Gore, fresh from his attendance at the Club of Rome comes out with HIS evangelisation of Climate Change and wins a Nobel Prize for his “Inconvenient truth” movie (just like Obama wins a Nobel Peace Prize! It is hilarious!). However, this is Al Gore when faced with his OWN inconvenient truths:

Did I mention ENRON earlier?

OOPS! Goldman Sachs, ENRON and Al Gore! WHAT a combination!

But then the governments push through the legislation. LEGISLATION (LEGAL not LAWFUL). Legislation can be enacted while the next government could repeal it. It happens every single day. Now if something is a law it is a law for good reason. But legislation isn’t law but guess who they can impose it upon because of the subrogation of rights and transfering those rights by way of REGISTRATION to the state? Yes, you guessed it – YOU!

Now WHY would our legislators in government DO this to us? I mean surely it impacts them as well doesn’t it? WELL DOESN’T IT?

?utm_source=allactivity&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=20110601

“Insider Trading Rules That Don’t Apply To Congress”

“Except that one thing you can do as a member is study pending legislation and regulatory changes, call up your broker and instruct him to trade on that nonpublic information. Do this as often as you want; you will suffer no penalty. There is no limit to how much money you can earn on insider trading in the House or Senate. Lawmakers and their staffers are specifically exempted.”

WELL, AS YOU CAN SEE……….. NO IT DOESN’T!

Now, I really do hope you are getting to grips with all of this because it is tiring me out trying to explain it in all so many ways.

Imagine if there were no such thing as continents and that the earth was just filled by 10 billion or more separate islands of about an acre each, each of which had one single family on it. Then, as the UN stated, we were all born free and equal such that everyone understood that and there was no possibility of grouping people into religions and nations. We all had boats and all had our own dedicated island. Would we have passports and birth certificates? Would we insist that if anyone visited our island, fell ill and we were Doctors that that they would need to produce a passport and then a birth certificate to be recognised as being worthy of treatment? Would one family decide to grow so large that they then said “stuff free and equal, I’m going to insist that all other islands can only trade if they use the currency I produce, otherwise I am going to build a bomb to ensure they do!”?

The world is sick because of the system which has been built up by a few. It doesn’t matter which “ism” that system falls under because each “ism” is controlled by the same few and each ism has been and will always be corrupted. It is us allowing these few to dictate to us while we are all meant to be “free and equal” that creates the misery, the deaths and the coercion. We have given them the power. It reall is time we take it back. How do we do that?

Simple: By embracing the (empty) words of the UN and giving them TRUE meaning. We cannot ever win by thinking of ourselves. Doing that just delays the time the corruption touches you or one of your family. The ONLY way is to embrace those ideas fully and apply them to all. Only then will the many tame the few.

And with that…. Goodnight.

Phil Donahue’s holocaust show!

Posted in Political History, The Corrupt SOB's by Earthlinggb . on February 2, 2014

An extremely interesting (and shocking that it was even allowed to be broadcast – but then Donahue used all the old tricks I suppose) Phil Donahue show from 1994 regarding the “holocaust”. The young jew, Cole, has been in hiding ever since because he had the audacity – particularly as a born jew himself – to state the gassing did not happen.

So, having heard the above, now turn to the outright jewish liars who, even when confronted and even when they admit they lied, they hold no regret and are not in the least bit phased by being found out to be charlatans, fakes and liars.

But no matter how many of these liars are found, the holocaust story will continue because no-one in the mainstream media nor in our governments have the balls to say it how it is. Do you know why that is? Because the head zionist himself, Rothschild, would ensure that, one way or another, they are destroyed. Rothschild need their fantasy to last. There is such a lot invested in it after all. If the world recognised that the holocaust AND 9/11 were bullshit, people like the Rothschilds would be strung up and die a very slow, painful death.

Then you have this…. and just for expressing himself, a priest (hardly a terrorist or a murderer – let’s not assume paedophile please. Not all are such as you know quite well otherwise you’re an idiot) is afraid of the fact that he, like many others, could be jailed for simple reason and simple questioning based on the evidence he is presented with. When this can happen (and it does in Germany) then the world is a very dangerous place and someone is desperately trying to suppress truth.

Then the “6 million” question is brought into sharp focus by the newspapers decades before Hitler was even thought of…

Then the swastikas painted on doors in a university were painted on by the jewish student herself.

To be a victim, even if it is a whole race, can be very lucrative and has been for “jews”. To continue all of this gives them such protection against any and all actions they may take (as a group) that, for you or I, we would be hit with the full extent of the law, but they, as a racial group (and particularly for the higher echelon bankers and to protect the atrocities of the IDF and Israeli government) they are provided greater rights based upon the history of between 70 years ago and a few thousand years ago. But it is not really to protect jews, it is to protect the “jewish”/Rothschild zionist crew.

 

 

 

 

The Pornographic jew

Posted in Media, New World Order Religion, Paedophilia, The Corrupt SOB's by Earthlinggb . on December 29, 2013

A lesson into the destruction of family and morality.

And the jew who writes about jews having significant control and influence over the pornography industry. These people will bleat and moan about my being “anti semitic” for writing such blogs yet it is IN THEIR OWN WORDS which they are more than happy to promote (because, as I see it very clearly, they have such a huge chip on their shoulder and are so full of inbred hatred of all peoples who are non jews and they want it all their way) but you know? They have such “pride” that they cannot stop themselves from boasting, thereby writing their own evidence against them. But then there’s always the fifth amendment right?

This just looks at ONE aspect of the protocols – the debasement of morality in society and lo and behold, once more the “jews” spearhead it.

The protocols of Zion

 

“The return of the head of the Snake to ZION can only be accomplished after the power of all the Sovereigns of Europe has been laid low, that is to say, when by means of economic crises and wholesale destruction effected everywhere, there shall have been brought about a spiritual demoralization and a moral corruption, chiefly with the assistance of JEWISH WOMEN masquerading as French, Italians, etc. These are the surest spreader of licentiousness into the lives of the leading men at the heads of nations.” –  Monica Lewinsky and Bill Clinton anyone?

“Behold the alcoholized animals, bemused with drink, the right to an immoderate use of which comes along with freedom. It is not for us and ours to walk that road. The peoples of the goyim are bemused with alcoholic liquors; their youth has grown stupid on classicism and from early immorality, into which it has been inducted by our special agents — by tutors, lackeys, governesses in the houses of the wealthy, by clerks and others, by our women in the places of dissipation frequented by the goyim. In the number of these last I count also the so-called “society ladies,” voluntary followers of the others in corruption and luxury.”

“In countries known as progressive and enlightened we have created a senseless, filthy, abominable literature. For some time after our entrance to power we shall continue to encourage its existence in order to provide a telling relief by contrast to the speeches, party programme, which will be distributed from exalted quarters of ours. Our wise men, trained to become leaders of the goyim, will compose speeches, projects, memoirs, articles, which will be used by us to influence the minds of the goyim, directing them towards such understanding and forms of knowledge as have been determined by us.”

 

Who are the Elders?

This is a secret which has not been revealed. The are the Hidden Hand. They are not the “Board of Deputies” (the Jewish Parliament in England) or the “Universal Israelite Alliance” which sit in Paris. But the late Walter Rathenau of the Allgemeiner Electrizitaets Gesellschaft has thrown a little light on the subject and doubtless he was in possession of their names, being, in all likelihood, one of the chief leaders himself. Writing in the Wiener Freie Presse, December 24, 1912, he said:

“Three hundred men, each of whom knows all the others, govern the fate of the European continent, and they elect their successor from their entourage. “

 

A FIFTEENTH CENTURY “PROTOCOL”

The principles and morality of these latter-day PROTOCOLs are as old as the tribe. Here is one of the Fifteenth Century which Jews can hardly pronounce a forgery, seeing that is taken from the Rothschild journal.

The Revue des etudes Juives, financed by James de Rothschild, published in 1889 two documents which showed how true the PROTOCOLs are in saying that the Learned Elders of Zion have been carrying on their plan for centuries. On January 13, 1489, Chemor, Jewish Rabbi of Arles in Provence, wrote to the Grand Sanhedrin, which had its seat in Constan- tinople, for advice, as the people of Arles were threatening the synagogues. What should the Jews do? This was the reply:

“Dear Beloved brethren in Moses, we have received your letter in which you tell us of the anxieties and misfortunes which you are enduring. We are pierced by as great a pain to hear it as yourselves.”

page93image1696

The advice of the Grand Satraps and Rabbis is the following:

“1. As for what you say that the King of France obliges you to become Christians: do it, since you cannot do otherwise, but let the law of Moses be kept in your hearts.

2. As for what you say about the command to despoil you of your goods [the law was that on becoming converted Jews gave their possessions} make your sons merchants, that little by little they may despoil the Christians of theirs.

3. As for what you say about their making attempts on your lives: make your sons doctors and apothecaries, that they may take away Christians' lives.

4. As for what you say of their destroying your synagogues: make your sons cannons and clerics in order that they may destroy their churches.

5. As for the many other vexations you complain of: arrange that your sons become advocates and lawyers, and see that they always mix themselves up with the affairs of State, in order that by putting Christians under your yoke you may dominate the world and be avenged of them.

6. Do not swerve from this order that we give you, because you will bind by experience that, humiliated as your are, you will reach the actuality of power."

Signed V.S.S.V.F.F., Prince of the Jews, 21st Caslue (November), 1489.

 

In the year 1844, on the eve of the Jewish Revolution of 1848, Benjamin Disraeli, whose real name was Israel, and who was a "damped", or baptized Jew, published his novel, Conningsby, in which occurs this ominous passage:

"The world is governed by very different personages from what is imagined by those who are not behind the scenes."

And he went on to show that these personages were all Jews.

Now the Providence has brought to the light of day these secret PROTOCOLs all men may clearly see the hidden personages specified by Disraeli at work "behind the scenes" of all the Governments. This revelation entails on all white peoples the grave responsibility of examining and revising au fond their attitude towards the Race and Nation which boasts of its survival over all Empires.

 

LORD SYDENHAM ON THE 'PROTOCOLS'

The following letter appeared in the "Spectator" of August 27th, 1921.

Sir,
When the PROTOCOLS first appeared in English it was pointed out that they embodied a forgery perpetrated by the Tsar's police with the idea of promoting pogroms. It now appears that they are adapted from a "pamphlet" of 1865 attacking the Second Empire." This is most interesting, but it explains nothing. As you point out, Mrs. Webster has shown the PROTOCOLS to be full of plagiarism which she effectively explained by the use of parallel columns, and before her most able book appeared Mr. Lucien Wolfe had traced other similarities. As the PROTOCOLS were obviously a compilation this was to be expected, and further resemblances may be discovered. The importance of the most sinister compilation that has ever appeared resides in the subject matter. The PROTOCOLS explain in almost laborious detail the objects of BOLSHEVISM and the methods of carrying it into effect. These methods were in operation in 1901 when Nilus said that he received the documents, but BOLSHEVISM was then MARXIAN COMMU- NISM, and the time had not come for applying it by military force. Nothing that was written in 1865 can have any bearing upon the deadly accuracy of the forecasts in the PROTOCOL, most of which have since been fulfilled to the letter. Moreover, the principles they enunciate corresponds closely with the recorded statements of JEWISH authorities. If you read the American edition, with its valuable annexes, you will understand this, and the confirmatory quotations there given can be multiplied. Even the "JEWISH WORLD DESPOTISM," which you described as a "piece of malignant lunacy," is not obscurely hinted at. Take this one quotation from JEWISH STATE, by Theodore Herzl:

"Where we sink we become revolutionary proletariat, the subordinate officers of the revolutionary party: when we rise, there rises also our terrible power of the purse."

page95image1384

Compare this ominous statement with those of the PROTOCOLS, of which it is plainly an echo.

"I note with thankfulness that you say that the discovery of the French pamphlet "does not clear up the whole mystery." Indeed it does not, and if you will carefully read Mr. Ford's amazing disclosure you will wish for more light. The main point is, of course, the source from which Nilus obtained the PROTOCOLS. The Russians who knew Nilus and his writings cannot all have been exterminated by the BOLSHEVIKS. His book, in which the PROTOCOLS only form one chapter, has not been translated though it would give some idea of the man. He was, I have been told by a Russian lady, absolutely incapable either of writing any portion of the PROTOCOLS or of being a party to fraud.

What is the most striking characteristic of the PROTOCOLS? The answer is knowledge of a rare kind, embracing the widest field. The solution of the "MYSTERY," if it is one, is to be found by ascertaining where this uncanny knowledge on which prophecies now literally fulfilled are based, can be shown to reside."

I am, Sir, &c., SYDENHAM

 

Here, we have a "jew" attempting to adapt the protocols to reflect they were written by jesuits/catholic church. The fact is it matters not who wrote them. What matters is that they were written over 100 years ago and accurately reflect the past 100 years of history and what is currently unfolding. You simply cannot ignore this.

 

THE JESUITS AND THE PROTOCOLS OF ZION

By the late Leo H. Lehmann

    IT IS ADMITTED by all intelligent people that the so-called "Protocols of the Wise men of Zion" are criminal forgeries, and could never have been written either by a group of Jews or Freemasons.  Yet their authorship remains unknown.  The amazing part of it is that this fantastic fraud has succeeded in its planned objective-- the ousting of all Judaic-Masonic influence in Central Europe by methods that would bring a blush to the cheek of a Torquemada.

      The contents of these alleged Protocols are well enough known, and have been broadcast in every country as authentic reports-- proces verbaux-- of secret conferences at which certain Jewish leaders drew up plans for the formation of an invisible world-government.  With the help of Masonic Lodges and the liberal, democratic, socialist and communist parties, these "Elders of Zion" are said to have conspired for the overthrow of all non-Jewish governments and to destroy all religions other than Judaism.  Every despicable means to weaken Christian institutions is set forth by the imaginary leaders of this vast conspiracy.

      All this is to be accomplished principally by means of the Masonic orders throughout the world, as the blind dupes and willing tools of this supraimperialism of the Jews.  Credit is claimed for the Jews in having instigated practically all revolutionary movements of the past century, assassinations of rulers and heads of states, all the wars, civil, racial and international, and all the upheavals in and throughout the nations-- from the Protestant Reformation to the economic conditions that resulted in our business depression.  Behind it all there is pictured the cold calculation, the unscrupulous cunning and murderous fanaticism of these Elders of Zion.  Protocol One tells of a vast army of spies and secret agents, well supplied with funds, who bore from within and create dissension and revolution in all countries.  Support of anarchist, communist, and socialist movements for the destruction of Christian civilization is outlined in Protocol Three; also the debasement and ruin of the currency system, leading to a world-wide economic crisis.  Universal war against any nation or group of nations, which fails to respond, is planned in Protocol Seven.  Protocol Ten contains particulars how all morality is to be undermined and leading statesmen blackmailed, compromised and calumniated in order to force them to serve the ends of the conspirators.*

      The secret conclave, at which these monstrous plans were purported to have been drawn up, is said to have been held under the auspices of "one of the most influential and most highly initiated leaders of Freemasonry"; they are also said to have been "signed by representatives of Zion of the Thirty-Third Degree."

      No group of organization could ever be as evil and satanic as these Judaic-Masonic Elders of Zion picture themselves to be.  They are the apotheosis of the anti-Christ, and could only have been conjured up by minds imbued with the fearful expectation of the eventual coming of an anti-Christ.

      It must be admitted that there is a certain similarity between this revolutionary plan of action and the Bolshevist program that followed the assassination of the Czar of Russia and the overthrow of the Kerensky regime.  But of the seventeen members of the Council of People's Commissars of the Soviet government at that time, only one, Trotsky, was a Jew.  Neither have the Masons ever been the least bit influential in Russia, either under the Czar or the Soviets.  A world-wide economic depression also has since happened, somewhat similar to that allegedly planned by these elders of Zion.  By no means, however, have the Jews and Masons ever so completely controlled the world's finances.  They suffered as much as others as a result of the economic debacle.

      The Nazi-Fascists, who have successfully exploited these Protocols to their great advantage, and who have  used these criminal forgeries to attain their primary objective, might well be accused of their authorship.  But their publication  antedated the rise of Fascism by a quarter of a century, when Hitler and Mussolini were youngsters learning their multiplication tables in school, and Franco babbling his "Hail Marys" at his mother's knee.

      Now, authorship of an anonymous document is best discovered from the document itself-- by the cause it favors and the enemies it depicts.  These will appear even if placed in reverse.  A clear sample of this can be seen from such an analysis of a part of these Protocols of Zion which I have before me.  It is a reprint from The Catholic Gazette, of February, 1936, a monthly publication of the Catholic Missionary Society of London, England.  Space limits permit the quotation of only parts of this nefarious document.

      The Judaic-Masonic conspirators are speaking:

      "As long as there remains among the Gentiles any moral conception of the social order, and until all faith, patriotism, and dignity are uprooted, our reign over the world shall not come...

      "We have still a long way to go before we can overthrow our main opponent: the Catholic Church...

      "We must always bear in mind that the Catholic Church is the only institution which has stood, and which will, as long as it remains in existence, stand in our way.  The Catholic Church, with her methodical work and her edifying and moral teachings, will always keep her children in such a state of mind as to make them too self-respecting to yield to our domination, and to bow before our future king of Israel...

      "That is why we have been striving to discover the best way of shaking the Catholic Church to her very foundations...

      "We have blackened the Catholic Church with the most ignominious calumnies, we have stained her history and disgraced even her noblest activities.  We have imputed to her the wrongs of her enemies, and have thus brought these latter to stand more closely by our side... We have turned her Clergy into objects of hatred and ridicule, we have subjected them to the contempt of the crowd... We have caused the practice of the Catholic Religion to be considered out of date and a mere waste of time...

      "One of the many triumphs of our Freemasonry is that those Gentiles who become members of our Lodges, should never suspect that we are using them to build their own jails, upon whose terraces we shall erect the throne of our Universal King of Israel...

      "So far, we have considered our strategy in our attacks upon the Catholic Church from the outside... Let us now explain how we have gone further in our work, to hasten the ruin of the Catholic Church... and how we have brought even some of her Clergy  to become pioneers of our cause.

      "We have induced some of our children to join the Catholic body, with the explicit intimation that they should work in a still more efficient way for the disintegration of the Catholic Church...

      "We are the Fathers of all Revolutions-- even of those which sometimes happen to turn against us.  We are the supreme Masters of Peace and War.  We can boast of being the Creators of the REFORMATION! (sic).  Calvin was one of our Children; he was of Jewish descent, and was entrusted by Jewish authority and encouraged with Jewish finance to draft his scheme in the Reformation.

      "Martin Luther yielded to the influence of his Jewish friends, and again, by Jewish authority and with Jewish finance, his plot against the Catholic Church met with success...

      "Thanks to our propaganda, to our theories of LIBERALISM and to our MISREPRESENTATIONS OF FREEDOM (sic), the minds of many among the Gentiles were ready to welcome the Reformation.  They separated from the Church to fall into our snare.  And thus the Catholic Church has been sensibly weakened, and her authority over the Kings of the Gentiles has been reduced  to almost naught...

      "We are grateful to PROTESTANTS for their loyalty to our wishes-- although most of them are, in the sincerity of their  faith, unaware of their loyalty to us...

      "France, with her Masonic government, is under our thumb.  England, in her dependence upon our finance, is under our heel; and in her Protestantism is our hope for the destruction of the Catholic Church.  Spain and Mexico are but toys in our hands.  And many other countries, including the U.S.A., have already fallen before our scheming...

      "Likewise, as regards our diplomatic plans and the power of our secret societies, there is no  organization to equal us.  The Jesuits are the only ones to compare with us.  But we have succeeded in discrediting them... for they are a visible organization, whereas  we are safely hidden under the cover of our secret societies.

      "But the Catholic Church is still alive...

      "We must destroy her without the least delay and without the slightest mercy... Let us intensify our activities in poisoning the morality of the Gentiles.  Let us spread the spirit of revolution in the minds of the people.  They must be made to despise Patriotism and the love of family, to consider their faith as a humbug... Let us make it impossible for Christians outside the Catholic Church to be reunited to that Church, otherwise the  greatest obstruction to our domination will be strengthened and all our work undone...

      "Let us remember that as long as there still remains active enemies of the Catholic Church, we may hope to become Masters of the World... And let us remember always that the future Jewish King will never reign in the world before the Pope in Rome is dethroned...

      "When the time comes and the power of the Pope shall at last be broken, the fingers of an invisible hand will call the attention of the masses of the people to the court of the Sovereign Pontiff to let them know that we have completely undermined the power of the Papacy... The King of the Jews will then be the real pope and the Father of the Jewish World-Church."

  (End of quotation.)

      When all this is placed in reverse, the following appears:

      The Catholic Church is the only upholder of morality, the social order, faith, patriotism and dignity...

      The Catholic Church is the only institution which has stood, and which will always stand, in the way of antichrist.

      The Catholic Church is the great exemplar of methodical work, edifying and moral teachings; she always keeps her children self-respecting, and will never bow to satanic allurements.

      Only when Catholics become ashamed of professing the precepts of the Church and obeying its commands, shall we have the spread of revolt and false liberalism.

      The Catholic Church has been blackened by the most ignominious  calumnies, her history has been stained, and her noblest activities disgraced.  The Practices of the Catholic Church are not out of date or a mere waste of time.

      Freemasonry is allied with Satan against the Catholic Church.  Not all priests are to be trusted; liberal Catholic priests only serve the work of the devil.

      The Reformation was the work of evil conspirators.  Calvin and Luther were financed by them to overthrow the Catholic Church.

      Freedom and liberty are mere misrepresentations of good.  Protestants have unwittingly helped to bring all the evils into our present world.  Protestant England aims to destroy the Catholic Church.  All that may happen in Spain and Mexico is a part of a plot against the Catholic Religion.

      The Jesuits are not an underhand organization, but all they do is open and above board.  The Jesuits are the only organization, however, who can defeat the force of evil in the world.

      Finally: As long as the Pope remains on his throne in Rome the world is safe...

      This is exactly what is taught in all Catholic schools.  Every retreat and mission given to priests and lay people begins with St. Ignatius' picture of "The Two Camps"-- the Catholic Church led by God on one hill, and the combination of Protestants, Jews, masons, communists, socialists and atheists on the other led by Satan.

      And all of this is to be found again in Father Coughlin's Social Justice magazine.  In its issue of February 5, (1940), for instance, he reiterates that the Catholic Church is "the ideal Christian Front" and proclaims that all those opposed to, or not with it, belong to anti-Christian groups which will soon "appear incarnated in the person of Antichrist himself."  He says that "lay Christian leadership of social matters is to be condemned." A Special Correspondent of his magazine in Rome writes an article that the "Only Hope of Christian Europe Lies in Rome," and that Europe can only be saved by the restoration of the Holy Roman Empire; that England, "who more than any other country now represents the neo-Judaic, anti-Catholic spirit," will be destroyed by Germany and Italy.  In another part of this issue, liberal Catholic priests, like Mgr. John A. Ryan, are called "Hireling Clergy" paid by left-wing revolutionary groups.  Towards the end is a trick questionnaire which implies twenty answers aimed to secure a poll from its readers which will be condemnatory of democracy.

      Although first published in Russia in 1903, the Protocols of Zion had their origin in France and date from the Dreyfus Affair, of which the Jesuits were the chief instigators.  They were planned also first to take effect in France, by the overthrow of the "Judaic-Masonic" government of the French Republic.  But the discovery of the gigantic fraud of Leo Taxil, who had been openly supported by the Jesuits, the concluding of the Franco-Russian alliance, along with the Vatican's difficulties with the French government at that time, made it more opportune to have them appear first in Russia.

      These Protocols of supposedly Jewish leaders are not the first documents of their kind fabricated by the Jesuits.

      For over a hundred years before these Protocols appeared, the Jesuits had continued to make use of a similar fraud called "The Secrets of the Elders of Bourg-Fontaine"  against Jansenism-- a liberal French Catholic movement among the secular clergy.   The analogy between the two forgeries is perfect-- the secret assemblage in the forest of Bourg-Fontaine, the plan of the "conspirators" to destroy the Papacy and establish religious tolerance among all nations, the alleged plot against Throne and Altar, and the setting up of a world-government in opposition to the Catholic Church.  There is the same dramatization of the negative pole of the historic evolution of the world, in order to bring out, by contrast, the positive Christian (Catholic) pole, around which all conservative forces-- the monarchy, the aristocracy, the army, the clergy-- must gather to save the world from Satan's onslaught.

      Analyzing, therefore, the ends to be attained by these Protocols of Zion, the means to be employed, the forces depicted as evil and those to be considered good, we must reach the conclusion that only to those, whose objectives these forgeries were clearly intended to serve, can their authorship be attributed.

  The End

(Originally taken from "Behind the Dictators," by L.H. Lehmann and reprinted by permission of Agora Publishing Company, New York 6, New York.  Copyright by Agora Publishing Company.)

Taken from Old Fashioned Prophecy Magazine, ed. Eric C. Peters, Vol. X, Nos. 5 & 6, September-December, 1968. pp. 29-37.      


   Knowledgeable Christians should know that this picture is not Scriptural.  It calls into question Revelation 17:18 and all of Revelation 18, with its great emphasis on verse 24.  Rome "Christian" is the culprit; NOT THE JEW! Hence we must decide between the veracity of the author of the Protocols and the veracity of our Lord Jesus Christ. - Editor, OFPM

 

Now on to porn today:

Triple-exthnics

Nathan Abrams on Jews in the American porn industry

Nathan Abrams  |  Winter 2004  -  Number 196

A story little told is that of Jews in Hollywood’s seedier cousin, the adult film industry. Perhaps we’d prefer to pretend that the ‘triple-exthnics’ didn’t exist, but there’s no getting away from the fact that secular Jews have played (and still continue to play) a disproportionate role throughout the adult film industry in America. Jewish involvement in pornography has a long history in the United States, as Jews have helped to transform a fringe subculture into what has become a primary constituent of Americana. These are the ‘true blue Jews’.

Smut peddlers

Jewish activity in the porn industry divides into two (sometimes overlapping) groups: pornographers and performers. Though Jews make up only two per cent of the American population, they have been prominent in pornography. Many erotica dealers in the book trade between 1890 and 1940 were immigrant Jews of German origin. According to Jay A. Gertzman, author of Bookleggers and Smuthounds:The Trade in Erotica, 1920-1940 (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1999), ‘Jews were prominent in the distribution ofgallantiana [fiction on erotic themes and books of dirty jokes and ballads], avant-garde sexually explicit novels, sex pulps, sexology, and flagitious materials’.

satanlust

mr411exotik1In the postwar era, America’s most notorious pornographer was Reuben Sturman, the ‘Walt Disney of Porn’. According to the US Department of Justice, throughout the 1970s Sturman controlled most of the pornography circulating in the country.

Reuben Sturman

Reuben Sturman

 

 

Born in 1924, Sturman grew up in Cleveland’s East Side. Initially, he sold comics and magazines, but when he realized sex magazines produced twenty times the revenue of comic books, he moved exclusively into porn, eventually producing his own titles and setting up retail stores. By the end of the 1960s, Sturman ranked at the top of adult magazine distributors and by the mid-70s he owned over 200 adult bookstores. Sturman also introduced updated versions of the traditional peepshow booth (typically a dark room with a small colour TV on which the viewer can view X-rated videos). It was said that Sturman did not simply control the adult-entertainment industry; he was the industry. Eventually he was convicted of tax evasion and other crimes and died, disgraced, in prison in 1997. His son, David, continued running the family business.

The contemporary incarnation of Sturman is 43-year-old Jewish Clevelander Steven Hirsch, who has been described as ‘the Donald Trump of porno’. The link between the two is Steve’s father, Fred, who was a stockbroker-cum-lieutenant to Sturman. Today Hirsch runs the Vivid Entertainment Group, which has been called the Microsoft of the porn world, the top producer of ‘adult’ films in the US. His specialty was to import mainstream marketing techniques into the porn business. Indeed, Vivid parallels the Hollywood studio system of the 1930s and 1940s, particularly in its exclusive contracts to porn stars who are hired and moulded by Hirsch. Vivid was the subject of a behind-the-scenes reality TV show recently broadcast on Channel 4.

Steven Hirsch - Vivid

Steven Hirsch – Vivid

Nice Jewish girls and boys

Jews accounted for most of the leading male performers as well as a sizeable number of female stars in porn movies of the 1970s and ‘80s. The doyen of the Hebrew studs is Ron Jeremy. Known in the trade as ‘the Hedgehog’, Jeremy is one of America’s biggest porn stars. The 51-year-old Jeremy was raised in an upper-middle-class Jewish family in Flushing, Queens, and has since appeared in more than 1,600 adult movies, as well as directing over 100. Jeremy has achieved iconic status in America, a hero to males of all ages, Jewish and gentile alike – he’s the nebbischy, fat, hairy, ugly guy who gets to bed dozens of beautiful women. He presents an image of a modern-day King David, a Jewish superstud who supersedes the traditional heroes of Jewish lore. No sallow Talmud scholar he. His stature was recently cemented with the release of a pornomentary about his life, Porn Star: The Legend of Ron Jeremy. As probably the most famous Jewish male porn star, Jeremy has done wonders for the psyche of Jewish men in America. Jeremy has also just released a compilation CD, Bang-A-Long-With Ron Jeremy. For £7.99 (including delivery), the lucky listener gets to enjoy Jeremy’s hand-picked favourite porno grooves along with narration by ‘the legend’ himself. As the publicity blurb gushes, ‘Out of the brown paper wrappings and into the mainstream’.

Seymore Butts, aka Adam Glasser, is everything that Jeremy is not: young, handsome and toned. Glasser, a 39-year-old New York Jew, opened a gym in 1991 in Los Angeles. When no one joined, he borrowed a video camera for 24 hours, went to a nearby strip club, recruited a woman, then headed back to his gym and started shooting. Although the movie stank, with a bit of chutzpah and a few business cards he wangled a deal with a manufacturer and started cranking out films. Within a few years, ‘Seymore Butts’ – his nom de porn which is simultaneously his sales pitch – became one of the largest franchises in the adult-film business. As the king of the gonzo genre (marked by handheld cameras, the illusion of spontaneity and a low-tech aesthetic meant to suggest reality), he is today probably the most famous Jewish porn mogul. Seymore Inc., his production company, releases about 36 films annually, most of them shot for less than $15,000, each of them grossing more than 10 times that sum. Glasser employs 12 people, including his mother and cousin Stevie as respectively genial company accountant (and matchmaker for her single son) and lovable but roguish general gopher. Glasser currently even has his own reality TV show (also broadcast on Channel 4), a ten-episode docu-soap calledFamily Business, whose opening credits show Glasser’s barmitzvah photo.

In search of a buck

Jews became involved in the porn industry for much the same reasons that their co-religionists became involved in Hollywood. They were attracted to an industry primarily because it admitted them. Its newness meant that restrictive barriers had not yet been erected, as they had in so many other areas of American life. In porn, there was no discrimination against Jews. During the early part of the twentieth century, an entrepreneur did not require large sums of money to make a start in the film business; cinema was considered a passing fad. In the porn business, it was similarly straightforward to get going. To show ‘stag’ movies or loops, as they were known, all one needed was a projector, screen and a few chairs. Not tied up with the status quo and with nothing to lose by innovation, Jews were open to new ways of doing business. Gertzman explains that

“Jews, when they found themselves excluded from a field of endeavour, turned to a profession in which they sensed they could eventually thrive by cooperating with colleagues in a community of effort . . . Jews have for a very long time cultivated the temperament and talents of middlemen, and they are proud of these abilities”.

The adult entertainment business required something that Jews possessed in abundance:chutzpah. Early Jewish pornographers were marketing geniuses and ambitious entrepreneurs whose toughness, intelligence and boundless self-confidence were responsible for their successes.

Of course, the large number of Jews in porn were mainly motivated by the desire to make profits. Just as their counterparts in Hollywood provided a dream factory for Americans, a blank screen upon which the Jewish moguls’ visions of America could be created and projected, so the porn-moguls displayed a talent for understanding public tastes. What better way to provide the stuff of dreams and fantasies than through the adult-entertainment industry? Performers did porn for the money. As ADL National Director Abraham H. Foxman commented, ‘Those Jews who enter the pornography industry have done so as individuals pursuing the American dream.’

Secular sex

Adam Glasser aka "Seymour Butts"

Adam Glasser aka “Seymour Butts”

Like their mainstream counterparts, Jews who enter porn do not usually do so as representatives of their religious group. Most of the performers and pornographers are Jewish culturally but not religiously. Many are entirely secular, Jews in name only. Sturman, however, identified as a Jew – he was a generous donator to Jewish charities – and performer Richard Pacheco once interviewed to be a rabbinical student.

Very few, if any, porn films have overtly Jewish themes, although Jeremy once tried to get several Jewish porn stars together to make a kosher porn film. The exception is Debbie Duz Dishes, in which Nina Hartley plays a sexually insatiable Jewish housewife who enjoys sex with anyone who rings the doorbell. It has sold very well, spawned a couple of sequels and is currently very hard to buy – perhaps indicating a new niche to exploit. Indeed, according to an editorial on the World Union of Jewish Students website,

“there are thousands of people searching for Jewish porn. After things like Jewish calendar, Jewish singles, Jewish dating, and Jewish festivals comes ‘Jewish porn’ in the list of top search keywords that GoTo.com provide”.

Sexual rebelsFamily business

Is there a deeper reason, beyond the mere financial, as to why Jews in particular have become involved in porn? There is surely an element of rebellion in Jewish X-rated involvement. Its very taboo and forbidden nature serves to make it attractive. As I written in these pages before,treyf signifies ‘the whole world of forbidden sexuality, the sexuality of the goyim, and there all the delights are imagined to lie . . .’ (‘Reel Kashrut: Jewish food in film’, JQ 189 [Spring 2003]).

According to one anonymous industry insider quoted by E. Michael Jones in the magazineCulture Wars (May 2003), ‘the leading male performers through the 1980s came from secular Jewish upbringings and the females from Roman Catholic day schools’. The standard porn scenario became as a result a Jewish fantasy of schtupping the Catholic shiksa.

Furthermore, as Orthodox Jew and porn gossipmonger Luke Ford explains on his website (lukeford.net): ‘Porn is just one expression of [the] rebellion against standards, against the disciplined life of obedience to Torah that marks a Jew living Judaism.’ It is also a revolt against (often middle-class) parents who wish their children to be lawyers, doctors and accountants. As performer Bobby Astyr put it on the same website, ‘It’s an “up yours” to the uncles with the pinky rings who got down on me as a kid for wanting to be musician.’

As religious influences waned and were replaced by secular ones, free-thinking Jews, especially those from California’s Bay Area, viewed sex as a means of personal and political liberation. America provided the freest society Jews have ever known, as manifested by the growth of the adult industry. Those Jewish women who have sex onscreen certainly stand in sharp contradiction to the stereotype of the ‘Jewish American Princess’. They (and I’m speculating here) may have seen themselves as fulfilling the promise of liberation, emancipating themselves from what feminist Betty Friedan in 1963 called the ‘comfortable concentration camp’ of the household as they set out into the Promised Land of the porno sets of Southern California. It signified their economic and social freedom: they were free to choose to enter, rather than coerced into it by economic and other circumstances. Once they had lain down, they could stand on their own two feet, particularly as female performers typically earn twice as much as their male counterparts.

Sexual revolutionaries

Extending the subversive thesis, Jewish involvement in the X-rated industry can be seen as a proverbial two fingers to the entire WASP establishment in America. Some porn stars viewed themselves as frontline fighters in the spiritual battle between Christian America and secular humanism. According to Ford, Jewish X-rated actors often brag about their ‘joy in being anarchic, sexual gadflies to the puritanical beast’. Jewish involvement in porn, by this argument, is the result of an atavistic hatred of Christian authority: they are trying to weaken the dominant culture in America by moral subversion. Astyr remembers having ‘to run or fight for it in grammar school because I was a Jew. It could very well be that part of my porn career is an “up yours” to these people’. Al Goldstein, the publisher of Screw, said (on lukeford.net), ‘The only reason that Jews are in pornography is that we think that Christ sucks. Catholicism sucks. We don’t believe in authoritarianism.’ Pornography thus becomes a way of defiling Christian culture and, as it penetrates to the very heart of the American mainstream (and is no doubt consumed by those very same WASPs), its subversive character becomes more charged. Porn is no longer of the ‘what the Butler saw’ voyeuristic type; instead, it is driven to new extremes of portrayal that stretch the boundaries of the porn aesthetic. As new sexual positions are portrayed, the desire to shock (as well as entertain) seems clear.

It is a case of the traditional revolutionary/radical drive of immigrant Jews in America being channelled into sexual rather than leftist politics. Just as Jews have been disproportionately represented in radical movements over the years, so they are also disproportionately represented in the porn industry. Jews in America have been sexual revolutionaries. A large amount of the material on sexual liberation was written by Jews. Those at the forefront of the movement which forced America to adopt a more liberal view of sex were Jewish. Jews were also at the vanguard of the sexual revolution of the 1960s. Wilhelm Reich, Herbert Marcuse and Paul Goodman replaced Marx, Trotsky and Lenin as required revolutionary reading. Reich’s central preoccupations were work, love and sex, while Marcuse prophesied that a socialist utopia would free individuals to achieve sexual satisfaction. Goodman wrote of the ‘beautiful cultural consequences’ that would follow from legalizing pornography: it would ‘ennoble all our art’ and ‘humanize sexuality’. Pacheco was one Jewish porn star who read Reich’s intellectual marriage of Freud and Marx (lukeford.net):

“Before I got my first part in an adult film, I went down to an audition for an X-rated film with my hair down to my ass, a copy of Wilhelm Reich’s Sexual Revolution under my arm and yelling about work, ‘love and sex’.”

As Rabbi Samuel H. Dresner put it (E. Michael Jones, ‘Rabbi Dresner’s Dilemma: Torah v. Ethnos’ Culture Wars, May 2003), ‘Jewish rebellion has broken out on several levels’, one being ‘the prominent role of Jews as advocates to sexual experimentation’. Overall, then, porn performers are a group of people who praise rebellion, self-fulfilment and promiscuity.

What are we ashamed of?

The likeness is stunning don't you think?

The likeness is stunning don’t you think?

This brief overview and analysis of the role and motivations behind pornographers and performers is intended to shed light on a neglected topic in American Jewish popular culture. Little has been written about it. Books such as Howard M. Sachar’s A History of the Jews in America (New York: Knopf, 1992) simply ignore the topic. And you can bet that the 350th anniversary of the arrival of the Jews in the United States did not include any celebrations of Jewish innovation in this field. Even the usually tolerant Time Out New York has been too prim to deal with it, although the more iconoclastic Heeb plans an issue on it. In light of the relatively tolerant Jewish view of sex, why are we ashamed of the Jewish role in the porn industry? We might not like it, but the Jewish role in this field has been significant and it is about time it was written about seriously.

Nathan Abrams is a Lecturer in Modern American History at the University of Aberdeen. He has just completed a book on neo-conservatism in the United States.

 

Well, As ADL National Director Abraham H. Foxman commented, ‘Those Jews who enter the pornography industry have done so as individuals pursuing the American dream.’ Our Abe will see nothing wrong with our Ron’s depiction of a christian cross spearing him through the throat so I guess our Abe can’t see anything wrong with this little ditty:

Star of david cutting throat

 

 

Our Abe, like a great musician but who I now recognise as a prick – Peter Gabriel – thinks Femen and Pussy Riot is all about “free speech” and there’s nothing hateful in that right?

So Abe and friends don’t see anything wrong with shit like this:

00-pussy-riot-femen-17-08-12

 

tumblr_m8wfu9Sauw1rauq8no1_500

 

Femen Al Qaeda

 

THE FEMINIST “AL QAEDA” INDEED!

 

From a little slut jewish Princess no doubt! (a non practicing secular one of course)

But I think Zappa says it best:

Of course David Icke and The People’s Voice will jump at the chance of having any of these jewish porn magnates on the shows. Give them a voice David! ;-)

Strange how he speaks of Rothschild Zionism then promotes porn on his station isn’t it? Or isn’t it?

Ask yourself why you are so hated?

Posted in Uncategorized by Earthlinggb . on July 21, 2013

The following video speaks for itself. David Irving says it just as I have always thought it.

If one finds oneself constantly derided by others then one must look in the mirror and ask oneself why? Is it everyone else who is just horrible or is it oneself? Do you need to change everyone else or, with reflection, should you perhaps consider changing yourself?

Why do so many people go to psychiatrists? Perhaps because they sense that, whatever it is that is affecting them is due to their own selves? That would appear to be the case and appear to be what almost everyone on this planet recognises. The answer lies within.

So, with that, I would simply say this: THE “JEWS” NEED A PSYCHIATRIC EXAMINATION!

 

 

 

 

After all, noone wishes to be called anti semite

 

 

The jews of Palestine: Then and now.

Posted in Political History, Politics, The Corrupt SOB's by Earthlinggb . on July 17, 2013

Well known and well established fact. But the speaker, even then, was told to be careful among who he spoke. Plus ca change, Plus c’est la meme chose.

 

So the question is: Who’s the jew?

The answer is quite obvious!

HC Deb 29 July 1924 vol 176 cc1919-77

Lieut.-Colonel T. WILLIAMS

I have listened with a certain amount of depression to the Debate this afternoon. I had thought that every party more or less in this country had decided that we ought to get, out of Iraq as soon as we possibly could. My experience in Iraq dates back many years. I only mentioned this point so as to give some reason for thinking that my opinion may be worth while. I went to Iraq first, to Bagdad, in 1904. I was one of four who were sent. by Lord Curzon to that part of Asia to carry out. propaganda against the Russians. For two years I travelled up and down the Turkish frontier and in Kurdistan and Armenia. Altogether, I have spent from 1904 to 1909 in that part. of the world in very intimate touch with those people, and I was there again during the War. I can assure the House that this Debate has been very unreal. We have been discussing things without any real appreciation of the situation in Iraq. The fact is that we have an absolutely artificial position. I think that the policy of staying there, adopted after the War, was a great mistake. I said so at the time in the light of my previous expreience, and I think our whole policy has been a mistake.

Everyone who knows about the situation in Iraq at the present moment and the 1952history of the putting of King Feisal on the throne, knows that the position is a purely artificial one which is supported by British arms. It might be argued that you could in a certain time develop there a Government that could stand by itself. In four years I think that it is impossible. In 20 years I believe it to equally impossible. Anyone who knows anything about the Arab Government. and the tribal government which exists—there are only two towns of any size in Iraq—and the sort of government which these people have had, will agree with me that it is impossible to expect that you are going to establish a government there which will remain a steady government and which will give adequate protection to all the people. My own opinion is—people may say that I am pro-Turk when I say this—that two years and more under the Turks gave Iraq a very reasonable government which Iraq could support financially, and my opinion is that the Turks should come back to Iraq, and that in the inevitable march of events something of that sort will occur.

But I have not risen to discuss this question of Iraq. This little Eastern Vote covers a fairly wide area, and all the various countries concerned are intimately connected. You cannot separate any particular country. I realise the difficulty of the Colonial Secretary. I realise that he has had to take over the inheritance of past Governments. We know that he has been trying very largely to clear up some of the results which have been forced upon us by the Coalition Government, of which the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Carnarvon Boroughs (Mr. Lloyd George) was the head. Therefore, I wish to say that I appreciate the difficulties of the Colonial Secretary and of the Government. But it is very necessary that those of us who have intimate knowledge of that part of the world should not lose any occasion of bringing the facts before the Government, and urging upon them the necessity of reconsidering the attitude which they have adopred.

As far as Iraq, Trans-Jordania and Arabia are concerned. I believe that the Government are honestly trying to get out of our responsibilities there. But there is one part of the world where they have accepted the policy of past. Governments, and are as definitely committed to the policy of past Governments as they could well be, and that is in Palestine, 1953and I wish on this Vote to raise the question of Palestine and to ask the Colonial Secretary—I do not expect to convince him—to reconsider the whole situation. If you look at the Near and Middle East one may truthfully say that in general we have now come round to a policy of consulting, and trying to pursue a policy in accordance with the wishes of, the inhabitants of those countries, but there is one exception, and that exception is Palestine.

In Palestine we are definitely ignoring the wishes of the people of the country and the policy which we are pursuing is a policy designed to carry out the desires of international jewry, and you are up against the definite proposition that you have in Palestine a policy pursued contrary to the desires of the inhabitants. I hope that the House will alow me to recapitulate very briefly the facts about Palestine. Everyone knows that the population of Palestine is predominantly Mahommedan. The population is about 750,000. Of these 650,000 are Mahommedans. About 50,000 or 60,000 are Christians, and the balance are Jews. There is no doubt that the Mahommedans and Christians are intensely hostile to the whole Zionist policy in Palestine. A considerable number of orthodox Jews in Palestine are also hostile to the policy. Over 90 percent. of the people of Palestine are hostile to the policy which we are pursuing.

We must remember that these people in Palestine, whether Jews, Moslem or Christian, are very largely the original inhabitants of Palestine. Events changed their religion. The original inhabitants, who had become Jews, under the Roman Empire became Christians, and under the Arab Empire became Mahommedans. The large majority of these people are in their national home. Outside Palestine you have a population of Jews of from 11,000,000 to 14,000,000. The policy that is being pursued in Palestine is in the interests of those 11,000,000 to 14,000,000. That policy is based on a Declaration, the Balfour Declaration of 1917. It is one of those declarations which one. would rather expect from the Government of that day, because it can be read several ways. It is quite possible, indeed, for the present Government to alter its policy, and I do not think that anyone could take exception 1954to it under that Declaration. This is what the Declaration says: His Majesty’s Government views with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for Jewish people and will use its best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, … Here a qualification is introduced. The declaration goes on: …. it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country. It is common knowledge to everyone that the speeches of the Zionists and the actions which were taken in Palestine did justify the inhabitants of Palestine in assuming that the policy to be pursued was to control Palestine in the interest of the Jews until the Jews became a majority in the country, when the Government could be handed over to them for Jewish control. It is in the recollection of the House that various events occurred as a reaction to that policy. It is quite true that, seeing the impossibility of forcing that policy upon the people of the country without an enormous exhibition of force, we have latterly been pursuing a policy which is much more moderate. That is admitted. But still we will not change our policy and admit that we made a mistake, and that we are definitely going to run the country in the interests of the Arab inhabitants, whether Christian, Jew or Moslem. We have brought the country to such, a state, that I am assured by friends whose opinion I value, who have had great experience in the East, that the people of Palestine are now so fed up that they would welcome the Turks back. I can well believe it.

The issue really is, shall Palestine be run in the interest of its present inhabitants or in the interests of international Jewry? I submit that we should have no hesitation in saying that the idea behind political Zionism is unsound, unworkable and against the best interests of the Jews themselves. There is no doubt that many Jews realise that fact. Mr. Morgenthau, the American Ambassador at Constantinople, characterised the Zionist desires as a disaster for the Jews. That statement is certain to turn out to be the case. The present policy is obviously a policy of controlling the country in the interest of 1955a privileged minority. I put it to the Minister that, at any rate, that is a policy contrary to the principles of our party. If it is to be supported there must be some very strong overriding arguments to justify it. When you press the supporters of Zionism into a corner on this question they generally fall back on two lines of argument. One is that the Jews are a Palestinian race who were exiled from Palestine and have been persecuted ever since, and that they ought to be allowed to return. The second is that the return of these Western Jews, with their ideas of progress, will cause such great improvement and raise the standard of the people of Palestine so much, that the policy will be of great benefit to the people of Palestine themselves.

I will deal with the second argument first. Those who know the East will agree that one of the great troubles between us and the East is our thinking that our ideas of progress must be suitable for the East. Eastern peoples do not appreciate our ideas of progress. I am satisfied to let the inhabitants of Palestine remain in the agricultural and pastoral conditions in which they live. I have lived in those conditions myself, and I think they are just as pleasant to live in as our Western conditions. If the people like them, it is no argument to say that they ought to he glad to benefit by some other system to which they have never been accustomed. Now I come to my strongest argument against the whole policy. That is the question, Are the Jews a race exiled from Palestine? If they are not, I submit that the whole case for Zionism falls to the ground. I want to bring forward some arguments, mainly from Jewish sources, that they are not a race. The first evidence I would give is my own. I am a doctor. I have spent 23 years in all the countries concerned—in Russia, the Balkans, Turkey, Persia, India and Arabia—and I have examined Jews from an anthropological point of view, and I have always been struck by the very great differences of race that obviously occur. Last year I went to the Near East specially to look at the Spanish Jews of Salonika and the Jews in Galatz. Anyone who saw them would agree that they obviously are different races. A study of other religions shows that it is extremely unlikely that 1956a religion could have spread in this way by migration of peoples, and then that there should have been such great increase in their population. The evidence of other religions supported the assumption that probably this great spread of Judaism in all these countries was due to Proselytism, as it had been in the case of all other great religions—Christianity, Mohammedanism, Bhuddism and the rest. But when one comes to history also, one finds that it is so. It is not generally believed to be so.

Of course, I cannot bore the House with a great deal of evidence, but I want to give evidence for each statement from Jewish sources. This is a short extract from a History of the Jews by Paul Goodman, a strong Zionist: While Judaism was, on the one side, suffering from losses occasioned by the absorption of a number of its members among their pagan neighbours, and, on the other, by the ultimate secession of the adherents of Jesus of Nazareth, large accessions to the ranks were taking place by numerous conversions to the faith of Israel. It is an old and still current misconception that Judaism is averse to the incorporation of strangers within its midst. But it is an entirely erroneous idea that the Jews are opposed to proselytism out of sheer tribal exclusiveness. Apart from the assimilation of the autochthonous population of Palestine and the forced conversion of the Edomites, Judaism acquired numerous adherents from among the various nations with which it came into contact from the time of the Babylonian captivity till the rise of the Christian Empire of Rome …. you find Jewish proselytes all over the Roman Empire and in neighbouring Parthica. If any Member wishes to pursue this subject he will find any amount of evidence, from Jewish authors themselves, that the Jews know this fact, that their adherents all over the world are the descendants of proselytes. They will be able to confirm my various statements. Being convinced that the Jews are the descendants of proselytes, when you come to examine the position of Jews in the world you find that tine-tenths of them outside Palestine are in Russia and Central Europe. You naturally ask how they came there. Again history gives an indication. It is a known historical fact that there was a very large Empire in Southern Russia, the Empire of Khazar, which was converted wholly to judaism. The Emperor of the Khazar, the grandees and the various large masses of the population were converted to Judaism 1957The Khazar Empire stretched through Bulgaria to the Caspian, from the Black Sea right up into Russia. I will give a small extract from a Jewish Encyclopaedia on this point: It was probably about that time that the Emperor of the Khazar and his grandees, together with a large number of his heathen people, embraced the Jewish religion. That is not all the evidence. There is more that will help; there is the anthropological evidence. If you turn to the science of anthropology and examine what the results show you will find” that the real Jew, the Jew of Palestine, who is an Arab, belongs to one of the longest headed races in the world. The Jews of Russia, are one of the broadest headed races in the world. Anyone wishing to pursue this subject can get the evidence.

 

Khazakstan

§Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHYOn a point of Order. May I ask whether this discussion regarding the anthropological aspect of the question would not be more appropriate on the Vote for the Ministry of Health, and the reference to Russia more appropriate on the Foreign Office Vote than on the Vote of the Colonial Office?

§The DEPUTY – CHAIRMAN (Mr. Entwistle)The hon. and gallant Member is giving a rather detailed history of the race, but I understand that he is giving reasons why the policy of the Government should be altered. I hope that he will not go into too great detail.

§6.0 P. M.

Lieut.-Colonel WILLIAMSI am sorry if I have gone into too great detail. It is obvious that my case rests upon this—that the Jews outside Palestine are not a Palestinian race. Therefore, it is necessary for me to give some evidence that I am not merely expressing a pious opinion. I will give the Committee only one further extract to show that there is anthropological evidence in favour of what I say. This is from a book on “The Races of Europe” by a distinguished anthropologist: The original Semitic stock must have been in origin strongly dolichocephalic, that is to say African as the Arabs are to-day; from which it follows naturally that about nine-tenths of the living Jews are as widely different in head form from the parent stock as they well could be. The boasted purity of descent of the Jews is, then, a myth. Renan is right after ali 1958in his assertion that the ethnographic significance of the word ‘Jew,’ for the Russian and Danubian branch at least, long ago ceased to exist. That concludes my evidence. I am sorry if I have bored the Committee, but I considered it necessary to support my statements by some evidence, and if any hon. Member wishes to pursue the subject further I shall be very glad to show him a great deal of further evidence. The case against Zionism rests on the fact that in Palestine you find a people who are in their national home, and it does not matter whether they are Christians, Jews or Mahommedans. Outside Palestine you have 11,000,000 people who claim Palestine as their national home and who are ready to go back there, whatever the people of Palestine may think at the present moment. My point is that, historically and generally, all the evidence goes to show that the Jews outside Palestine are not the descendants of people who ever came out of Palestine; that Palestine is not their national home, but that their national home is in Southern Russia and Central Asia. If I am right in my contention, it is obvious you are acting most, unjustly in subordinating the wishes of these poeple who are in their national home to the wishes of people whose national home it never was.

§Earl WINTERTONThe speech which the hon. and gallant Gentleman has just delivered is the sort of speech which is exceedingly grateful to a party anxious to keep off the decision on any particular Vote, and as I am sure the hon. and gallant Gentleman has not made the speech for that reason, I can only congratulate him, in the name of the Committee, on being such an enthusiastic and expert anthropologist. At the same time, he will not think it out of place if I observe that his references to the Jewish race and to his dislike for their racial characteristics, belong to the class of speech in regard to which one ought to exercise great care.

Lieut.-Colonel WILLIAMSI am not aware that in my speech I expressed any dislike of the Jewish race. I am an anti-Zionist, but large numbers of Jews themselves are anti-Zionists.

§Earl WINTERTONLet me put it differently. When the hon. and gallant Gentleman observes—as he did, because 1959it was the whole basis of his argument—that the Jews are not a race, I should, if I may do so without impertinence, advise him to use that argument with considerable care in some circles in this country, because I do not think it would be very popularly received. What struck me about the hon. and gallant Gentleman’s speech was that he delivered what I can only describe as a very elaborate attack upon Zionism in Palestine on the ground of the impossibility of reconciling the aspirations of Zionism with the aspirations of Arab and Christian nationalism in that territory, and yet neither the hon. and gallant Gentleman nor any one who Spoke from those benches either above or below the Gangway, except the Secretary of State for the Colonies, has put the case which I propose to put to the Committee for Arab nationalism or nationality—whichever you like to call it—in Iraq itself.

I hope the Committee will accept from me the assurance, which is perfectly sincere, that I speak solely from the point of view of a supporter of Arab nationalism and nationality, not only because as it happens, I am a close personal friend of King Feisal and members of his former and present Governments, but because I had the privilege and advantage of serving as a comrade-in-arms with him during the campaign in 1918. From those years onwards I have been a strong adherent of Arab nationalism both in the House of Commons and on platforms in the country, and I have advocated giving a chance to Arab ………

 

http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/commons/1924/jul/29/middle-eastern-services#S5CV0176P0_19240729_HOC_326

 

The new “Khazaria”:

The Kazakh foreign minister praised the prime minister and Tony Blair, who is advising the president, for helping to improve the republic’s image on the world stage.

Erlan Idrissov said: “We are very honoured and privileged to have such attention on the part of two prime ministers [towards] Kazakhstan – Tony Blair and David Cameron. We cherish and enjoy the support of developed countries on our part for development … We are grateful that Mr Tony Blair and his colleagues are providing invaluable advice.”

 

DC and Khazakstan

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2013/jul/01/david-cameron-business-amnesty-kazakhstan-deal-nazarbayev

 

Blair Khazakstan

 

Jewish Khazakstan

 

Jew Khazak

 

There aren’t that many of them but they don’t half pop up everywhere huh? From the UK Commons and Lords to the US Congress and Senate. And now, in Khazaria – sorry, Khazakstan – their true home and they want it back. After all, all that oil and other resources in a huge country bordering on Russia and China. Strategically positioned on Brzezinski’s “Grand Chessboard”.

And where they pop up, Tony and David do too. EVERY TIME! ;-)

 

British Government: WHORES to Babylon!

 

Borat: Purely coincidence but, like all Baron-Cohen’s characters, you can see right through the talmudic/jewish propaganda.

You don’t think Baron-Cohen’s an idiot do you? :-)

 

??????????????

 

Jews.

Posted in Media by Earthlinggb . on July 18, 2012

Their own words in their own media. I guess it’s “anti semitic” to repost their own words though right?

 

No further comment necessary.

 

 

BUT NO MANNY, IT ISN’T BECAUSE EACH OF YOU INDIVIDUALLY HAVE A “SPARK”, IT’S SIMPLY BECAUSE YOU ACT AS A NEPOTISTIC TRIBE WHICH IS A INHERENTLY RACIST IIDEOLOGY IN OF ITSELF. WHILE, DO YOU SERIOUSLY EXPECT THE GOYIM TO BELIEVE THAT DAVID CAMERON AND WILLIAM HAGUE AND GEORGE OSBOURNE, PETER MANDELSON, THE MILIBANDS AND TONY BLAIR (OH AND DON’T FORGET JIM MURPHY AND A WHOLE HOST OF OTHERS) PROCLAIM TO BE ZIONIST BECAUSE THEY ACTUALLY ARE? RATHER THAN THEY KNOW FROM WHERE THE BRIBE MONEY COMES FROM! SO PLEASE FRIEDMAN, DON’T TRY TO PLAY THE TOUCHES OF REVERSE PSYCHOLOGY ON ME YOU PRICK!

 

 

 

 

We Jews are a funny breed. We love to brag about every Jewish actor. Sometimes we even pretend an actor is Jewish just because we like him enough that we think he deserves to be on our team. We brag about Jewish authors, Jewish politicians, Jewish directors. Every time someone mentions any movie or book or piece of art, we inevitably say something like, “Did you know that he was Jewish?” That’s just how we roll.

We’re a driven group, and not just in regards to the art world. We have, for example, AIPAC, which  was essentially constructed just to drive agenda in Washington DC. And it succeeds admirably. And we brag about it. Again, it’s just what we do.

But the funny part is when any anti-Semite or anti-Israel person starts to spout stuff like, “The Jews control the media!” and “The Jews control Washington!”

Suddenly we’re up in arms. We create huge campaigns to take these people down. We do what we can to put them out of work. We publish articles. We’ve created entire organizations that exist just to tell everyone that the Jews don’t control nothin’. No, we don’t control the media, we don’t have any more sway in DC than anyone else. No, no, no, we swear: We’re just like everybody else!

Does anyone else (who’s not a bigot) see the irony of this?

Let’s be honest with ourselves, here, fellow Jews. We do control the media. We’ve got so many dudes up in the executive offices in all the big movie production companies it’s almost obscene. Just about every movie or TV show, whether it be “Tropic Thunder” or “Curb Your Enthusiasm,” is rife with actors, directors, and writers who are Jewish. Did you know that all eight major film studios are run by Jews?

Pretty, pretty, pretty, pretty good. (photo credit: CC BY-SA Angela George/Wikimedia Commons)

Pretty, pretty, pretty, pretty good. (photo credit: CC BY-SA Angela George/Wikimedia Commons)

But that’s not all. We also control the ads that go on those TV shows.

And let’s not forget AIPAC, every anti-Semite’s favorite punching bag. We’re talking an organization that’s practically the equivalent of the Elders of Zion. I’ll never forget when I was involved in Israeli advocacy in college and being at one of the many AIPAC conventions. A man literally stood in front of us and told us that their whole goal was to only work with top-50 school graduate students because they would eventually be the people making changes in the government. Here I am, an idealistic little kid that goes to a bottom 50 school (ASU) who wants to do some grassroots advocacy, and these guys are literally talking about infiltrating the government. Intense.

Now, I know what everyone will say. Thateveryone tries to lobby. Every minority group and every majority group. That every group has some successful actors and directors. But that’s a far call from saying that we runHollywood and Madison Avenue. That the Mel Gibsons of the world are right in saying we’re deliberately using our power to take over the world. That we’ve got some crazy conspiracy going down.

Okay. Fine. So some of that is kooky talk.

But let’s look at it a bit deeper.

Maybe it’s true: everyone lobbies. Maybe it’s true there are actors of every ethnicity out there. But come on. We’re the ones who are bragging about this stuff all the time. Can’t we admit that we’re incredibly successful? Can’t we say it to the world?

I’ll give my theory for why Jews don’t want to talk about their control of the media.

First of all, as much as Jews like to admit that so many of them are successful, and that so many of them have accomplished so much, they hate to admit that it has to do with they’re being Jewish. Maybe they’ll admit that it has something to do with the Jewish experience. But how many Jews will admit that there is something inherently a part of every single one of them that helps them to accomplish amazing things?

The ADL chairman, Abe Foxman, was interviewed in a great article about the subject and he said that he “would prefer people say that many executives in the industry ‘happen to be Jewish.’” This just about sums up the party line.

The truth is, the anti-Semites got it right. We Jews have something planted in each one of us that makes us completely different from every group in the world. We’re talking about a group of people that just got put in death camps, endured pogroms, their whole families decimated. And then they came to America, the one place that ever really let them have as much power as they wanted, and suddenly they’re taking over. Please don’t tell me that any other group in the world has ever done that. Only the Jews. And we’ve done it before. That’s why the Jews were enslaved in Egypt. We were too successful. Go look at the Torah — it’s right there. And we did it in Germany too.

This ability to succeed, this inner drive, comes not from the years of education or any other sort of conditional factors, but because of the inner spark within each Jew.

Now, the reason groups like the ADL and AIPAC hate admitting this is because, first of all, they are secular organizations. Their whole agenda is to prove that every Jew is the same as every other person in the world. I cannot imagine a more outlandish agenda. No, we’re different. We’re special.

And clearly, that whole thing about big Jewish noses was totally blown out of proportion. (illustrative photo: Abir Sultan/Flash 90)

And clearly, that whole thing about big Jewish noses was totally blown out of proportion. (illustrative photo: Abir Sultan/Flash 90)

Of course, people hate when anyone says this. They assume that if you’re saying that Jews are special, it somehow implies that they’re better.

To be honest, I’m not really sure what the word “better” even means. What I do know is that being special simply means a person has a responsibility to do good.

I think that’s the real reason most Jews are so afraid to admit that there’s something inherently powerful and good about them. Not because they’re afraid of being special. But because they’re afraid of being responsible. It means that they’re suddenly culpable when they create dirty TV shows that sully the spiritual atmosphere of the world. It means that things can’t just be created for the sake of amusement or fun or even “art.”

Suddenly, we can’t screw up the world.

The interesting thing is that Jews have done so much for the world in so many other ways. They’ve moved forward civil rights; they’ve helped save lives in Darfur, Haiti and just about everywhere else.

But that’s not enough. Fixing the world physically is only half the battle.

Our larger battle, the harder battle, is elevating the world spiritually. And this is what the people that fight with every inch of their soul to prove that Jews are just the same as everyone else are afraid of. It means that we can no longer just “express ourselves.” We’ll have to start thinking about the things we create and the way we act. It means we’ll have to start working together. It means we’ll have to hold one other, and ourselves, to a higher standard.

The time has come, though. We no longer have to change our names. We no longer have to blend in like chameleons. We own a whole freaking country.

Instead, we can be proud of who we are, and simultaneously aware of our huge responsibility — and opportunity.

*      *      *

This article was written under an assumed name. 

 

 

jews-do-control-the-media

 

 

Oh, and just in case there are some new readers. They don’t stop there. There’s a lot more to these people than meets the eye and, just as Manny here says, when they own the media (and we’re talking Zionists here – globalist zionists to be more precise since Israel is not enough for these people) we’re hardly going to get the full picture on the BBC etc now are we?

When Cammy and Blair etc all get paid by the zionists and Messrs Rothschild, then the government of the UK is going to ensure that the British Intelligence vetted BBC is going to play the game now aren’t they?

So, just for those who may look at the muslims of this country and blame them for the multiculturalism, take a listen. You will be surprised and you will wonder how the hell this works. Well, when you understand the game, it is very easy to figure out how this works…

 

Beautiful jews and UN news!

Posted in Law, Politics, The Corrupt SOB's, Uncategorized by Earthlinggb . on November 18, 2011

I am attacked continuously for being “Anti semite”.

People read but do not interpret the words properly.

People are so used to simply reading or hearing a few words which they then focus on and remove from all context. It is the world of soundbites.

People read and hear then interpret, not what is actually being said but what they wish to interpret.

I have literally been face to face with people who have simply closed down and refuse to listen or discuss and communicate to try and reach a conclusion where they would then actually understand what is meant rather than what they wish to interpret. I have been the victim of police/judiciary action specifically because of this. Even the latter don’t listen. They interpret a statute and simply apply it because “that is what it says” and “from what you said and wrote, directly contravenes that statute or our interpretation of what you said and wrote while we actually do not fully appreciate the broader issues we just concentrate on the narrow focus of what the statute says and what you have written”.

So then, I ask myself: If I AM an “Anti semite” then how can I call this group of people in the video beautiful? They’re jews. They proclaim their identity as such. They are proud of their jewish roots. I realise every religion on earth is man made and a manipulation tool but I also recognise the majority do not even though it is quite obvious. As the lad says in the video “circles” and he is told to put his “circle” (the jewish circle) above all others  and he RECOGNISES the fundamental racism in this. Religions are entirely for the purpose of creating the world we have full of a single human race who are separated into factions like a Venn diagram. Each subset seeing itself as a “race” and the barriers are already set in place. Religion IS racism at its core and it has been, is and may always be a wonderful tool of those who are within  not the 1% but the 0,01%.

But, whether I recognise this or not and those who follow their religions don’t, I can still see and appreciate beautiful people of whatever “race”, nationality or religion because they simply have humanity.

These young jews see the issue. They even recognise why jews have been persecuted over so many centuries and they recognise the “jewish” (I would like to show them why this “jewish” lot within the 1% and 0.01% are not jewish) influence within Banking and Corporate worlds. AND they are speaking out against it. They see how this money is being ploughed into the deaths and oppression of so many not only in Palestine but in Iraq, Afghanistan and anywhere else that does not play the globalist game and who wish to maintain their sovereignty.

Anyone can be evil no matter what “race” or religion they proclaim to be. The issue with the jewish “race” is that their religious teachings have been used, abused and hijacked but zionism and freemasonry. The zionist (Rothschild zionist) element have then used jews (the holocaust story while the zionists had every opportunity to transfer jews from danger – read the Transfer agreement) to enable and strengthen their “hand” and their calls for a jewish only state. They used Jewish blood to do this and they did it purposefully. Yet it is Aipac, JDL, ADL etc who proclaim the horrors of those events where jews have been persecuted yet, throughout, it has been a tiny group of wealthy and powerful men who have murdered jews to achieve their aims. These powerful individuals then setting up these Zionist organisations and brainwashing jews into believing zionism is just the wish for a jewish homeland (when, strangely, any and all other peoples who would demand such would be considered xenophobic racists).

Basically, it has been a mindfcuk. Exceptionally well orchestrated but so many jews believe in the ideology OR they have been bribed by being part of the “chosen people” who have such massive control of the entire world’s wealth through money manipulation. These young jews even refer to this and can see it.

But as there is a jewish circle, there is a circle above that which is zionist (the NWO agenda zionists motivated by money, power and greed) and above that there is a “Catholic or Jesuit” circle. There are many circles and it is the destruction of ALL circles (the Venn diagram subsets) which is needed.

If the wish for no circles, no “races” and no manipulated, state/UN controlled religion while wishing to bring an end to the LEGAL control of the world’s population through birth registration to an authoritarian state apparatus and bringing an end to the manipulation of money and the corruption of law through legislation of victimless “crimes” is anti semitic, then YES, I AM anti semtitic.

However, I can’t see how it is possible for an anti semite to literally find a lump in his throat while watching and listening to beautiful people who happen to be jewish!

So I simply wish to express my thanks to these young jews because I have children whom I do not wish to inherit a world which is becoming (and is) controlled by a very few psychopathic despots following some form of “code” which is written within Babylonian/Judaic texts. When I see and hear such from young jews, it makes everything seem so much brighter looking to the future. This “chosen ones” ideology needs to be destroyed because it is the precise equivalent of the Nazi ideology of the “Master race” – the terms mean one and the same thing.

Zionism and all circles require destruction. To do so, we need to focus on those in that 0.01% who have constructed them and maintain them. It IS a “war” and it is a real one – very much so. In fact, it has been the entire war for decades/centuries and winning it means peace. Globally. I don’t advocate violence (but then neither does the UN or any state at face value do they? but then they bomb the living daylights out of anyone in their way) because knowledge and education can achieve the same ends (and why they don’t wish for the money to go to such uses). There IS the need, however, to put the true criminals in jail for various forms of crime on humanity.

Now HERE is where I will lose some people:

The UN is a PRIME criminal organisation within the entire global scheme of things. The ironic thing is that they display it openly but people just do not wish to see it.

“What a ridiculous thing to suggest!” I can hear so many people state. Yes it appears to be doesn’t it? After all, UN Declaration of Human Rights and all that. :-)

Ok, let’s look at the first 3 articles of that declaration:

Article 1.

  • All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.

Article 2.

  • Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.

Article 3.

  • Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.

Sounds good doesn’t it? Ah! But wait a second. There is a HUGE, MASSIVE, in fact IMMENSE contradiction in it.

“All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.” Question: Do you wish to disagree with this statement?

No, I didn’t think so.

So then what about this.

“Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration.”

Question: Do you see the problem? It is staring you right in the face!

Let’s return to Thomas Paine for a moment from another blogpost:

Human rights originate in Nature, thus, rights cannot be granted via political charter, because that implies that rights are legally revocable, hence, would be privileges:

It is a perversion of terms to say that a charter gives rights. It operates by a contrary effect — that of taking rights away. Rights are inherently in all the inhabitants; but charters, by annulling those rights, in the majority, leave the right, by exclusion, in the hands of a few… They… consequently are instruments of injustice.

Question: What is the UN Articles of Human Rights?

Answer: It is a POLITICAL CHARTER and a LEGAL DOCUMENT.

While the charter states, absolutely factually, that every person is born FREE and EQUAL, it then goes on to entirely contradict this very concept by stating “everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this declaration”.

Now, there are many issues with this which I sincerely hope the reader can see quite clearly.

IF people are BORN “free and equal” (which we are and I challenge anyone to disagree with such) then they are free and equal. End of story. Being free and equal MEANS that NOONE may infringe your “god given” human rights. What obviously follows from this, then, is that, just as noone can infringe your rights, noone has the authority over another to abridge them, to reduce them or even to state what your rights are! But this is precisely what the UN has done in their declaration. They state, effectively, that these are the rights, ACCORDING TO THEM, that you are allowed. Individual states then enact these rights to varying degrees, within their own state LEGISLATION (more legality). Every single time “rights” are written within legal parameters, they are diluted and from the very day the UN Articles were written, they diluted your “rights” within the global LEGAL system.

IF you are born FREE and EQUAL then I am afraid that IF the UN and the State is serious in its proclamation of such, then YOU have every right to say “Thanks but no thanks” to their “offer” of “protection” for, as a FREE and EQUAL man or woman, you may contract with whatever INDIVIDUAL or ORGANISATION you wish. If you are effectively stopped from making such a FREE and EQUAL decision (and remember the UN, as with ALL organisations, is composed of OTHER “FREE and EQUAL” individuals) then your rights are, in fact, being impinged upon. There is no two ways about this.

Now, the number of “rights” the UN provides you (“provides you”? HOW can they PROVIDE rights when you are already born absolutely FREE and EQUAL? This is the equivalent of a magician’s slight of hand trick) are limited. Forgive me for the following but it is for the purposes of demonstrating something:

Does the UN Articles articulate in any way that you have the right to fart on a public street? OR, what if you are standing in a queue in a bank and you’ve just had a chilli con carne? What if the bank wishes to pass a bye law for it’s own PRIVATE premises that NOONE may fart on its premises? Does the UN declaration state that everyone has the right to fart (a natural human process) wherever and whenever they wish? No, it doesn’t. So, the point is, what is stopping ANY organisation or group of people (even the state) from imposing a statutory act that states “No smoking and no farting in licensed premises”?

Yes, it’s a silly example but it is meant to be. The point is that the declaration is stating “these are your rights and that is it”. No no no. If you accept this then you accept your rights being removed.

THE SUBROGATION OF YOUR “GOD GIVEN” HUMAN RIGHTS TO THE STATE IS A FUNCTION OF YOUR BIRTH REGISTRATION. YOU MUST UNDERSTAND THIS! See the blogpost entitled “UN inadvertently confirms freeman concept”.

Now what about the third article?

“Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person”.

ANOTHER interesting statement and concept from the UN so let’s look at that more closely:

Article 6 (Survival and development): Children have the right to live. Governments should ensure that children survive and develop healthily.

Now ignoring for a moment that this makes me laugh from the perspective that it is like saying “Children have the right to live but adults don’t”, there is something just as astounding. That is the following:

The September 2001 attacks signalled the only occasion in NATO’s history that Article 5 of the NATO treaty has been invoked and consequently the 11 September attacks were deemed to be an attack on all nineteen NATO members. After 11 September, troops were deployed to Afghanistan under the NATO-led ISAF and the organization continues to operate in a range of roles sending trainers to Iraq, assisting in counter-piracy operations and most recently enforced a NATO-led no-fly zone over Libya in 2011 in accordance with UN SC Resolution 1973.

The Berlin Plus agreement is a comprehensive package of agreements made between NATO and the European Union on 16 December 2002. With this agreement the EU was given the possibility to use NATO assets in case it wanted to act independently in an international crisis, on the condition that NATO itself did not want to act—the so-called “right of first refusal”. There are currently 28 member states of NATO, with the most recent being Albania and Croatia who joined in April 2009. The combined military spending of all NATO members constitutes over 70% of the world’s defence spending. The United States alone accounts for 43% of the total military spending of the world and the United Kingdom, France, Germany, and Italy account for a further 15%.

Now, let’s put some perspective on this. 70% of the world’s defence spending is borne by the US, UK, France, Germany and Italy. These countries ALSO form the major founding nations within the UN and have the most voting shares. NATO, generally, finds its LEGALITY to interfere with any and all nations on the basis of UN resolutions. The following results from this interference:

The following is a transcript of a speech given by now 13-year-old Charlotte Aldebron at a peace rally in Maine.

When people think about bombing Iraq, they see a picture in their heads of Saddam Hussein in a military uniform, or maybe soldiers with big black mustaches carrying guns, or the mosaic of George Bush Senior on the lobby floor of the Al-Rashid Hotel with the word “criminal.” But guess what? More than half of Iraq’s 24 million people are children under the age of 15. That’s 12 million kids. Kids like me. Well, I’m almost 13, so some are a little older, and some a lot younger, some boys instead of girls, some with brown hair, not red. But kids who are pretty much like me just the same. So take a look at me—a good long look. Because I am what you should see in your head when you think about bombing Iraq. I am what you are going to destroy.

If I am lucky, I will be killed instantly, like the three hundred children murdered by your “smart” bombs in a Baghdad bomb shelter on February 16, 1991. The blast caused a fire so intense that it flash-burned outlines of those children and their mothers on the walls; you can still peel strips of blackened skin—souvenirs of your victory—from the stones.

But maybe I won’t be lucky and I’ll die slowly, like 14-year-old Ali Faisal, who right now is in the “death ward” of the Baghdad children’s hospital. He has malignant lymphoma—cancer—caused by the depleted uranium in your Gulf War missiles. Or maybe I will die painfully and needlessly like18-month-old Mustafa, whose vital organs are being devoured by sand fly parasites. I know it’s hard to believe, but Mustafa could be totally cured with just $25 worth of medicine, but there is none of this medicine because of your sanctions.

Or maybe I won’t die at all but will live for years with the psychological damage that you can’t see from the outside, like Salman Mohammed, who even now can’t forget the terror he lived through with his little sisters when you bombed Iraq in 1991. Salman’s father made the whole family sleep in the same room so that they would all survive together, or die together. He still has nightmares about the air raid sirens.

Or maybe I will be orphaned like Ali, who was three when you killed his father in the Gulf War. Ali scraped at the dirt covering his father’s grave every day for three years calling out to him, “It’s all right Daddy, you can come out now, the men who put you here have gone away.” Well, Ali, you’re wrong. It looks like those men are coming back.

Or I maybe I will make it in one piece, like Luay Majed, who remembers that the Gulf War meant he didn’t have to go to school and could stay up as late as he wanted. But today, with no education, he tries to live by selling newspapers on the street.

Imagine that these are your children—or nieces or nephews or neighbors. Imagine your son screaming from the agony of a severed limb, but you can’t do anything to ease the pain or comfort him. Imagine your daughter crying out from under the rubble of a collapsed building, but you can’t get to her. Imagine your children wandering the streets, hungry and alone, after having watched you die before their eyes.

This is not an adventure movie or a fantasy or a video game. This is reality for children in Iraq. Recently, an international group of researchers went to Iraq to find out how children there are being affected by the possibility of war. Half the children they talked to said they saw no point in living any more. Even really young kids knew about war and worried about it. One 5-year-old, Assem, described it as “guns and bombs and the air will be cold and hot and we will burn very much.” Ten-year-old Aesar had a message for President Bush: he wanted him to know that “A lot of Iraqi children will die. You will see it on TV and then you will regret.”

Back in elementary school I was taught to solve problems with other kids not by hitting or name-calling, but by talking and using “I” messages. The idea of an “I” message was to make the other person understand how bad his or her actions made you feel, so that the person would sympathize with you and stop it. Now I am going to give you an “I” message. Only it’s going to be a “We” message. “We” as in all the children in Iraq who are waiting helplessly for something bad to happen. “We” as in the children of the world who don’t make any of the decisions but have to suffer all the consequences. “We” as in those whose voices are too small and too far away to be heard.

We feel scared when we don’t know if we’ll live another day.

We feel angry when people want to kill us or injure us or steal our future.

We feel sad because all we want is a mom and a dad who we know will be there the next day.

And, finally, we feel confused—because we don’t even know what we did wrong.

Charlotte Aldebron, 13, attends Cunningham Middle School in Presque Isle, Maine. Comments may be sent to her mom, Jillian Aldebron at aldebron@ainop.com.

But then we’ll hear the UN, through UNICEF saying “But look what we do? Look what we ARE doing for the Iraqi mothers and children!”

And all I will say is this: Yes, AFTER you have killed their fathers and destroyed their families, their infrastructure, their way of life and are now ready to rebuild in YOUR image! Incorporate an Iraqi Central Bank and provide “loans” which are carrots with strings attached to indebt the nation, control its resources and infrastructure and make DAMNED SURE those Iraqi children have their births registered (forget so many will be born with cancers due to depleted uranium which the UN states is still legal!! FORGET THAT!) so that they can be “RECOGNISED IN LAW” just as the rest of the west is. The controlling mechanism by which you can then impose taxes and duties and have them subjugated to the legalities which YOU impose!

Your damned righteous, pius, hypocrisy makes me want to puke!

So WHERE is the rights of tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of children who have been MURDERED by the States, the governments who the UN states should ensure their survival and healthy development? The “right to life”? Within a legal document which also legitimizes the taking of life? The UN does not say SOME children have the right to life and that governments should ensure the survival of SOME. Neither does it say that it is ok to drop cluster bombs and tomahawk missiles and machine gun from helicopters  SOME children in the interests of saving more. It says ALL children. This is NOT a utilitarian world and neither does the UN articles suggest it SHOULD be. But the UN and the nations who compose the UN and NATO seem to think so!

So where were the rights of all these children murdered? Where were the rights of the thousands of palestinian children murdered by Israel in operation Cast Lead and others? Where are the warcrime tribunals for the Blairs and the Bush’s, Sarkozy’s etc etc? WHERE ARE THEY?

The answer? “Ah! But they’re OUR warcriminals! That’s the difference!”

But wait, didn’t you say that every child is born free and equal? Ah but then that is a pure lie UN because, as you say so very clearly, it is not until children are recognised LEGALLY, that, in fact, they do exist. And if they are not registered and have no birth certificate then they have no rights to ANY confered benefits by ANY state or government. So then they DO NOT, in your eyes, have any rights (privileges) from the moment they are born therefore, they are NOT born “free” until you bestow those rights upon them!

But then the “ying” of that “yang” is that you cannot control or tax them either if they are unregistered because they have not SUBROGATED their “god given” human rights to the legalities of which you promote. Once they do, you have them just where you want them!

One registers one’s car, one is the REGISTERED KEEPER but NOT owner. For if that car is your own private property then who (if you are free and equal) has the right to stop you from using it? But the DVLA does BECAUSE you have subrogated your ownership (rights) to your private property and may only use it under strict licence conditions.

One registers their child’s birth, one is then subrogating one’s authority (not responsibility however) to one’s child. You are transfering the legal “ownership” of your child to the state. The state, then, if it so desires, may take your child from you and this is NOT always because you are a bad parent but because you may just be an irritant to the state in one form or another. However, the bottom line is that IF we are all free and equal then NOONE, no individual or state or organisation has ANY right to remove your child. But they do because you CONTRACTED with them by registering your child. You have (ignorantly but through your ignorance, under no coercion) entered a LEGAL agreement with the state where you have transfered such inexhaustive rights to them AND they have handed you a legal document called a Human Rights Act, in place of your natural born rights. It’s brilliant and effective but it is a con and it is a crime on humanity because while they pretend it provides you with rights (and it does to a very small degree in comparison to the inexhaustive rights you were born with), it ensures that your entire life can be controlled from birth to death.

More Childs Rights:

Article 7 (Registration, name, nationality, care): All children have the right to a legally registered name, officially recognised by the government. Children have the right to a nationality (to belong to a country).

Question: Do they also have the right to forego a legally registered name officially recognised by the government state? And do they have the right to forego a nationality and retain their free, sovereign, human rights undiluted by the UN articles? When they do, the UN and the state then say they do not exist legally and therefore they are not “qualified” for any protection. They have no rights to freedom of movement around the world (no passport), they will not be allowed to find a job (oh dear! The state then won’t be able to tax anyone if everyone can’t find a job because everyone decides that they wish to utilise that freedom and equality to NOT register). So UN, all I am askng is: Are we free? :-) Not until you tell us we are right?

Article 8 (Preservation of identity): Children have the right to an identity – an official record of who they are. Governments should respect children’s right to a name, a nationality and family ties.

I had and have an identity. I had one even before my parents registered me. I was their child and they gave me a name which they then simply believed they were making a record of when registering. They did not know they were subrogating my rights and providing me with a “monopoly piece” called a birth certificate which only then would allow me to buy and sell and contract – oh! And I forgot, also made me vulnerable to going to jail for a victimless “crime” based upon state legislation AND had me liable to immense increases in taxation to pay off a national debt that doesn’t need to exist if the state did not borrow its currency but simply issued it. Neither would I then have the PM state that I am liable for bailing out the banks and having then to endure austerity measures while these criminals were paid off, destroying my career, pension, savings etc. No I wasn’t told that and neither were my parents. I would guess, then, that that constitutes a case of non full disclosure of the contract set up BY the birth certificate. Doesn’t the “law” state that, in the case of one party to a contract not giving full disclosure then the contract is null and void? Yes, I think it does. Cheerio government. Knock on my door and you can respectfully fcuk off. Our contract is null and void!

Article 41 (Respect for superior national standards):

If the laws of a country provide better protection of children’s rights than the articles in this Convention, those laws should apply.

Interesting. WHO decides this? The state? or the UN? If either one of them then it surely would be that either party will vote for itself. If not decided by either of them then by whom? Whoever it is that decides however, is that not a decision for the party who may be affected by it? That would be the child (or possibly the parent) would it not? If you are suggesting some individual or some organisation other than the child or it’s parent makes that decision then you are stating that we are not all free and equal are you not? Or is it just some are more free and equal than others?

Article 24 (Health and health services):

Children have the right to good quality health care – the best health care possible – to safe drinking water, nutritious food, a clean and safe environment, and information to help them stay healthy. Rich countries should help poorer countries achieve this.

Tell that to NATO and the major UN nations who control it.

After all of that UN – TAKE A LOOK IN THE MIRROR AND RECOGNISE YOU OUTSTANDING HYPOCRISY.

But then who controls you?

Oh yes, I forgot. This guy and his ilk:

 

Article 6.

  • Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law.

Yes indeed. YOUR “law”. It’s so wonderful that you want the 50M children each year who are unregistered to be registered. And it is so wonderful that you had 750,000 children in Afghanistan given vaccines while, at the same time, you had administrators, attending along with the medical staff, to register these children.

Isn’t it a coincidence, then, that David Rockefeller makes the fiollowing speech regarding his concern about the world’s population growth and overconsumption and prospects of a decent life on this planet (for who?) within a UN speech he gave:

Isn’t it also then, a coincidence that Rockefeller, within this speech, also referred to the Earth Summit in Rio in 1992 which promoted the entire Climate Change. Sustainability agenda as proposed by the Club of Rome originally in their publication in 1972 called “limits to growth” which was then followed up in 1993 when they published “The first Global Revolution”? Obviously being written before and during the year of the Earth summit then released as a “guidance”.

The United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED), also known as the Rio Summit, Rio Conference, Earth Summit (Portuguese: Eco ’92) was a major United Nations conference held in Rio de Janeiro from 3 June to 14 June 1992.

Why is that all a coincidence? Well, because:

The Club of Rome is a global think tank that deals with a variety of international political issues. Founded in 1968 at David Rockefeller’s estate in Bellagio, Italy, the CoR describes itself as “a group of world citizens, sharing a common concern for the future of humanity.” It consists of current and former Heads of State, UN bureaucrats, high-level politicians and government officials, diplomats, scientists, economists, and business leaders from around the globe. It raised considerable public attention in 1972 with its report The Limits to Growth. The club states that its mission is “to act as a global catalyst for change through the identification and analysis of the crucial problems facing humanity and the communication of such problems to the most important public and private decision makers as well as to the general public.”

Well well well, there’s old Rockefeller’s name again! But there’s more because:

In 1993, the Club published The First Global Revolution. According to this book, divided nations require common enemies to unite them, “either a real one or else one invented for the purpose.” Because of the sudden absence of traditional enemies, “new enemies must be identified.” “In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill….All these dangers are caused by human intervention, and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy then, is humanity itself.”

But then there’s even more:

Rockefellers’ 1Sky Unveils the New 350.org: More $ — More Delusion

World’s Greatest Magic Trick “If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.” – George Orwell On 6 April 2011 it was announced that the RINGO (Rockefeller initiated NGO) 1Sky and their sister organization 350.org have ‘officially merged’ into one mass climate movement – the ‘NEW’ 350.org.
Let the Vatican preach, hallefuckinglujah, as we double-up on the soma followed by a double shot of absinthe burning like the embers of hell. Thank you Rockefellers, Clintons, McKibben and friends. Make way for the onslaught of illusion in which green capitalism and false solutions will somehow save us. In one last final performance – the elites will now perform their final magical act that defies all logic. Drum roll please … ladies and gentleman … we will now embrace the same system which is systematically destroying us – splash it with a green patina … and now … this same system will magically save us. Justice for all! The illuminated signs flash toward the audience … applause! applause! applause! Follow the Money
An example of what two prominent environmental groups, 1Sky and 350.org, receive from the Rockefeller foundations alone:
Step it Up and 350.org (Sustainable Markets Foundation)
·         $100,000 for 1 year awarded on March 13, 2008 to support its project, Step it Up’s new initiative called Project 350 ·         40,000 2008 Rockefeller Family Fund (RFF) for Sustainable Markets Foundation | 350.org ·         $100,000 for 1 year awarded on March 3, 2009 for its Project 350 ·         $200,000 for 1 year awarded on March 12, 2009 for its climate accountability project, The Sustainable Market Foundation ·         $75,000 for 1 year  awarded on November 7, 2009 for its project 350.org ·         $25,000 for 1 year awarded on March 22, 2010 for its Eco-Accountability project ·         $100,000 for 1 year awarded on June 17, 2010 for its 350.orgproject

1Sky Education Fund

·         $1,000,000 for 2 years awarded on December 13, 2007 ·         $20,000 for 1 year awarded on November 17, 2008 for an alignment meeting of U.S. climate change leaders ·         200,000 2008 RFF ·         45,000 2008 RFF ·         $250,000 for 1 year awarded on June 18, 2009 ·         $30,000 for 1 year awarded on April 9, 2009 to support a consultant to coordinate the alignment of U.S. climate change leaders and large grassroots organizations ·         $250,000 for 1 year awarded on November 2, 2009 ·         $250,000 for 1 year awarded on November 19, 2009 ·         50,000 2009 RFF ·         15,000 2009 RFF ·         20,000 2009 RFF

 

350.org: The Environmental and sustainability group who are “Anti” Big oil and big business. FUNDED by the scions of Big Oil and Big Business, the Rockefeller Foundation! (Standard Oil/ENRON) How ABSOLUTELY bizarre! Until you understand the agenda!

The Climate change scam, brought to you by the very same scam artists who crashed the world’s economy, own the central banking system, loan all governments their currency, own and control the IMF, the UN, the world’s largest investment banks, the major oil and gas corporations, big pharma (vaccines) and much anything else you can imagine. While they fund organisations proclaiming to be anti capitalist and anti big business and while the Occupy movement is filled with the Environmental “Greenies” who are completely oblivious to facts and wish to remain so:

 

THESIS and ANTITHESIS: WORKS EVERYTIME! :-)

But there’s even more:

Investment banker speaking about the amount of tax which could be imposed upon the world’s population to “fight” this “invented for the purpose” SCAM called Climate change, before he then introduces the one and only DAVID DE ROTHSCHILD – the “Jesus” of Climate Change while part of the other and more massively wealthy through banking and big business families.

HOW EXTRAORDINARILY BIZARRE!

 

But AGAIN, there’s more:

Al Gore, fresh from his attendance at the Club of Rome comes out with HIS evangelisation of Climate Change and wins a Nobel Prize for his “Inconvenient truth” movie (just like Obama wins a Nobel Peace Prize! It is hilarious!). However, this is Al Gore when faced with his OWN inconvenient truths:

Did I mention ENRON earlier?

OOPS! Goldman Sachs, ENRON and Al Gore! WHAT a combination!

But then the governments push through the legislation. LEGISLATION (LEGAL not LAWFUL). Legislation can be enacted while the next government could repeal it. It happens every single day. Now if something is a law it is a law for good reason. But legislation isn’t law but guess who they can impose it upon because of the subrogation of rights and transfering those rights by way of REGISTRATION to the state? Yes, you guessed it – YOU!

Now WHY would our legislators in government DO this to us? I mean surely it impacts them as well doesn’t it? WELL DOESN’T IT?

?utm_source=allactivity&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=20110601

“Insider Trading Rules That Don’t Apply To Congress”

“Except that one thing you can do as a member is study pending legislation and regulatory changes, call up your broker and instruct him to trade on that nonpublic information. Do this as often as you want; you will suffer no penalty. There is no limit to how much money you can earn on insider trading in the House or Senate. Lawmakers and their staffers are specifically exempted.”

 

WELL, AS YOU CAN SEE……….. NO IT DOESN’T!

 

Now, I really do hope you are getting to grips with all of this because it is tiring me out trying to explain it in all so many ways.

Imagine if there were no such thing as continents and that the earth was just filled by 10 billion or more separate islands of about an acre each, each of which had one single family on it. Then, as the UN stated, we were all born free and equal such that everyone understood that and there was no possibility of grouping people into religions and nations. We all had boats and all had our own dedicated island. Would we have passports and birth certificates? Would we insist that if anyone visited our island, fell ill and we were Doctors that that they would need to produce a passport and then a birth certificate to be recognised as being worthy of treatment? Would one family decide to grow so large that they then said “stuff free and equal, I’m going to insist that all other islands can only trade if they use the currency I produce, otherwise I am going to build a bomb to ensure they do!”?

The world is sick because of the system which has been built up by a few. It doesn’t matter which “ism” that system falls under because each “ism” is controlled by the same few and each ism has been and will always be corrupted. It is us allowing these few to dictate to us while we are all meant to be “free and equal” that creates the misery, the deaths and the coercion. We have given them the power. It reall is time we take it back. How do we do that?

Simple: By embracing the (empty) words of the UN and giving them TRUE meaning. We cannot ever win by thinking of ourselves. Doing that just delays the time the corruption touches you or one of your family. The ONLY way is to embrace those ideas fully and apply them to all. Only then will the many tame the few.

And with that…. Goodnight.

 

I “offended” a Cyberjew Detective!

Posted in Law by Earthlinggb . on November 7, 2011

DO YOU UNDERSTAND THE WORD “MANIPULATION”?

OR THE WORD “DECEPTION”?

I’m asking you Detective! Do you understand ANYTHING? Even when it is logically laid out before your eyes?

You come to MY home and DRILL my doorlock on the basis of some quack Judge’s determination that you should search and sieze (STEAL) my property from me because there was an “altercation” between myself and a “cyber-individual” on a messageboard who could have been anyone/thing and who may well have had an agenda – and if/when you look closely at the ENTIRE communications from start to finish, it is clearly seen that I was posting about a wide variety of issues on that messageboard for weeks/months before this individual ever started to respond to anything. Clearly, then, my postings were not for the purposes of offending  this individual (which the individual alleges).

Now, let me explain something to you Detective which, I am sure, you had never even been aware of or given any thought to. Perhaps the quack judge has, who knows? Perhaps the quack judge fully subscribes to the Anti Defamation League ethos that, if anyone so much as farts at a jew, he’s an anti semite! Ignore the FACT that the person is not attacking jews per se but ZIONISTS and their governmental and Corporate/Banking whores who would slit a jew’s throat as quickly as they would slit yours or mine if it was beneficial to them!

So here goes Detective. A little education for you and your buddies at the station and, perhaps, for a few robed personnel too:

“WE DO GOD’S WORK” – Lloyd Blankfein

Goldman-Sachs-chief-says-Gods-work-defends-banks-bumper-profits.html

Now WHY do you think this quote was spread across the pages of mainstream newspapers when he stated it back in 2009 Detective? You possibly weren’t even aware of it I’d guess.

Well, because it was headline making: A banker having the audacity to suggest that they do “God’s work”! Since when was ANY “God” a banker? In fact, if you take Jesus (NEW Testament) you will see he cast out the moneychangers from the temple! He despised USURY. That is why the Christian faith – and as far as I and so many others in this country called Britain, are aware, we live in a christian country. Check our CONSTITUTION which you haven’t even read Detective! – banned USURY until the 1600s! Ah but history means nothing to you does it Detective? Ignorance kills indeed! It also then steals!

So, then, was it ALLAH who was a banker? Or Muhammad? WHO the hell was a banker out of all the deities which ever existed Detective? A million dollar prize for you if you can come up with one!

And let me just stop here to state I’m in no way religious before you get any ideas!

But let’s now look at that quote from Lloyd Blankfein within the perspective of HIS (professed) “faith” shall we?

Go check the Old Testament Detective! You can’t justify what you have done on the basis of your abject ignorance while ASSUMING that, just because YOU don’t take any of this seriously, that there is noone else who does. I can assure you they do! As you will, hopefully recognise by the time I’m finished educating you here!

ISAIAH
60:10  And the sons of strangers shall build up thy walls, and their kings shall minister unto thee:

60:11  Therefore thy gates shall be open continually; they shall not be shut day nor night; that men may bring unto thee the forces of the Gentiles, and that their kings may be brought.

60:12  For the nation and kingdom that will not serve thee shall perish; yea, those nations shall be utterly wasted.

61:6  Ye shall eat the riches of the Gentiles . . .

I’ll present the FULL text of 61:6 for you and repeat it (because it is repeated in whichever bible you wish to pick up!):

New International Version
(©1984)
And you will be called
priests of the LORD, you will be named ministers of our God. You will feed on
the wealth of nations, and in their riches you will boast.New Living Translation (©2007)
You will be
called priests of the LORD, ministers of our God. You will feed on the treasures
of the nations and boast in their riches.

English Standard Version
(©2001)
but you shall be called
the priests of the LORD; they shall speak of you as the ministers of our God;
you shall eat the wealth of the nations, and in their glory you shall boast.

New American Standard
Bible
(©1995)
But you will be
called the priests of the LORD; You will be spoken of as ministers of our God.
You will eat the wealth of nations, And in their riches you will boast.

King
James Bible (Cambridge Ed.)

But ye shall be named the Priests of
the LORD: men shall call you the Ministers of our God: ye shall eat the
riches of the Gentiles, and in their glory shall ye boast yourselves.

GOD’S WORD® Translation (©1995)
You will be called the
priests of the LORD. You will be called the servants of our God. You will
consume the wealth of the nations. You will boast in their splendor.

American King
James Version

But you shall be named the Priests of the LORD: men
shall call you the Ministers of our God: you shall eat the riches of the
Gentiles, and in their glory shall you boast yourselves.

Get the picture so far Detective? I hope so! It doesn’t take a PhD and I can readily assume you don’t have one of them! Particularly not in Divinity!

Now REMEMBER, because this is CRUCIAL: The Old Testament is not the Testament of Jesus Christ! Not in a million years is the “God” of the Old Testament the same as the “God” of the New Testament. The Old Testament is also referred to as the TORAH in Judaism and while there are messianic jews who accept the New Testament, fundamental or orthodox Judaism does not!

So when the CEO of Goldman Sachs – a professed “jew” – states he is doing “God’s Work”, there is not, in any shape or form, any other reference he can be making! And THAT “God” he is referring to is not the same “God” as Jesus Christ.

Such a “God” then, is blatantly and transparently RACIST even on the basis of that ONE quote which the self professed “jew”, Lloyd Blankfein, suggests he follows!

In Barnes’ notes on the Bible, they say, in reference to the above:

But ye shall be named – The idea here literally is, ‘There will be no need of
your engaging in the business of agriculture. All that will be done by others;
and you, as ministers of God, may engage wholly in the duties of religion. The
world shall be tributary to you, and you shall enjoy the productions of all
lands; and you may, therefore, devote yourselves exclusively to the service of Yahweh, as a kingdom of priests.’ A similar promise occurs in Exodus 19:6 : ‘And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation.’ The idea is, that there would be a degree of spiritual prosperity, as great as if they were permitted to enjoy all the productions of other climes; as if all menial and laborious service were performed by others; and as if they were to be entirely free from the necessity of toil, and were permitted to devote themselves exclusively to the services of religion.

So, you see Detective, their “God” has favourites and they are it! That is why we have “Jews and Gentiles” or “Jews and GOYIM”. These “jews” who actually believe all this shit work it day by day, week by week, year in year out and THEY BELIEVE IT. Now, are you trying to tell me that THAT is not the ULTIMATE form of racism? The rest of the human race is GOYIM (cattle) – that includes YOU detective, unless you’re mother was a jew! – and we are here to serve the “master race”. Now doesn’t that remind you of something? Hitler/Nazism spring to mind?

Ah but no. While it is obvious to a blind man that “master race” is what these people believe in, they use the softer term of “chosen people” don’t they?

Doesn’t sound QUITE so bad until you give it a moment’s thought!

“You shall eat the wealth of nations” and “For the nation and kingdom that will not serve thee shall perish; yea, those nations shall be utterly wasted.” Nice! That’s one hell of a “God” don’t you think Detective? Just the type of guy who would feed the five thousand with loaves and fishes. I guess while we’ve all meant to be “God’s creatures”, he has his favourites and if you weren’t a jew (and Christ wasn’t a jew) then you were fcuked!

Getting the picture even clearer Detective? Yes? No? Duh?

But there’s something else to this because, as you can see in the Barnes’ notes, and in the bible quotes, “God” is suggesting his “priests” his “chosen ones” dictate their life to the services of religion NOT money! But what if…….

What if money is their religion? And that is made patently obvious by Lloyd Blankfein’s suggestion that Goldman Sachs and the International Bankers are doing “God’s Work”. God’s work, then OBVIOUSLY being money and money being god.

“In God we trust!”

You MUST have gotten the picture by now Detective! Either that or your detective skills in being able to see what is under your noce are severely lacking and if I was your boss I’d sack you! AND the “Judge”.

But JUST in case, how about a few more little passages just to make sure:

Deuteronomy:

15:2  And this is the manner of the release: Every creditor that lendeth ought unto his neighbour shall release it; he shall not exact it of his neighbour, or of his brother; because it is called the LORD’s release.

15:3  Of a foreigner thou mayest exact it again: but that which is thine with thy brother thine hand shall release;

15:6  For the LORD thy God blesseth thee, as he promised thee: and thou shalt lend unto many nations, but thou shalt not borrow; and thou shalt reign over many nations, but they shall not reign over thee.

19:1  When the LORD thy God hath cut off the nations, whose land the LORD thy God giveth thee, and thou succeedest them, and dwellest in their cities, and in their houses;

20:15  Thus shalt thou do unto all the cities which are very far off from thee, which are not of the cities of these nations.

20:16  But of the cities of these people, which the LORD thy God doth give thee for an inheritance, thou shalt save alive nothing that breatheth:

Again…. Nice!

Now, let’s just check this guy out:

Gene Simmons of the band KISS. A jew.

Now, I’M offended by all of this. I’m SERIOUSLY offended! But, whereas the jews have an anti defamation league to go to make their complaint AND they have a professed ZIONIST Prime Minister and cabinet who get funded with massive amounts of jewish money to put in legislation for them; Plus, the legislature then adds so called “Hate crimes” which the judiciary then impose upon the general public to ensure the general public shut up, the general public who are NOT jews (and that is by far the majority in the UK, have no equivalent to an Anti Defamation League nor do they have a professed Christian in the PM role but a PM with JEWISH VALUES!

What if a bunch of Muslims, or catholics, or buddhists or rastafarians or quakers or protestants or luciferians (not a good example I have to say) decided to create their own official EU Parliament? Would the people of the EU and our governments not be offended and up in arms against it and deride it as blatant racism/xenophobia? Something that the EU, in particular, SUGGEST they wish to stamp out.

So then how do we arrive at this?

PARIS (EJP)—The launch of a European Jewish Parliament which
ambitions to become the “influent voice of the Jewish community” in Europe and elsewhere was announced Monday in Paris in the framework of a conference of the European Council of Jewish Communities (ECJC), an organization dedicated to Jewish education, culture and identity.

50141     Go figure!

Meanwhile, you have these same people working in Think Tanks and funded to spread that jewish ethos and their agenda throughout the EU:

What comes first? The chicken or the egg? They’re own words and actions create the perceived “anti semitism”. So what comes first? “Anti semitism” or THEIR actions which actually promotes it?

Now, I would think that, if you are interested in the law at all Detective, that you would agree that everyone is equal before the law? Every single Judge alive would have to make this admission so I guess you would also.

Therefore, it would not be serving the purposes of the law if we were to allow ANYONE to impose their own values upon another otherwise one may be OFFENDED by such!

So let me make this abundantly clear for you and your quack Judge: I will NOT have David Cameron or anyone else IMPOSE their jewish or ANY other values upon me by way of having some powerful organisation to do so. Whether that organisation is the Government and the State of the United Kingdom OR whether it is the Anti Defamation League. If the PM(s) of this country get their funding from certain sources then use their own prejudices to impress upon government, state and legislative bodies, THEIR values, then that is NOT equality before the law!

And if YOU, Detective, are here to impose those values upon me then YOU Detective are simply part of a thug gang working for a government/state acting on behalf of some form of Jewish mafia!

Let me be clear then if that is the case: FUCK YOU!

As for the idiot “cyber individual” I don’t know from Adam, with whom I had the “altercation” with: If I ended up “offending” him then there is something which each and every person on that messageboard can do: 1. Stop communicating with someone – which he didn’t!

2. Click ignore on all posts from the “offensive” person – which he didn’t.

What any SANE person would not do is continue the debate, argue, goad and obviously enjoy (yes enjoy when you add “smiles” to your comments) the altercation while THREATENING to report because you didn’t like the content.

So YOU are offended by certain issues and you end up expressing exactly WHY you are offended and the sheer expression of WHY you are offended, while providing solid examples, “offends” someone who is seemingly a member of the group who is offending you! So THEY make a complaint and, because they did and you didn’t, they end up having Detectives drilling in your door and siezing almost £2000 of your property? And THAT is “democracy and law”??

By way of an example of this “Jew’s” modus operandi, let’s look at a series of communications this cyber individual – who calls himself a jew and may well be – had with ANOTHER “jew” female on the same messageboard:

The thread was entitled “Legal professionals crucify jews at Nuremberg” and it is the FULL ‘debate’ from start to finish (thus far):
Female:
And this is how the Tricycle advertises the play…
Disgraceful!
The kinds of sham professionals promoted by the West makes me sick
Male:
Haven’t you done enough damage on her yet, Sandra?
(It should be noted at this point that the male, in his usual, childish and condescending fashion, changes the title of the thread from that point to “Sandra crucifies the jews” As you can and will see, we are studying the exceptional talents of two individuals who believe in the “superiority” in intellect, art and science of Jews over and above everyone else. Oh and did I mention also philosophy?)
Female:
Why Edward was Hitler Jewish? Were the prosecutors at Nuremberg Jews or do you just object to me pointing out that the gentiles crucified the Jews at Nuremberg by refusing to prosecute…by giving immunity…by complicit Holocaust Denial….
Your comments are ill-advised and radically injurious to me.
Male:
Sandra, your comments are ill-advised and radically injurious to the entire Jewish population!
Female:
I find no evidence of that Edward and frankly nor actually of you being a Jew…inasmuch as your posts are deeply antiSemitic. But you protest and protest and pose…so everyone thinks you are a Jew assaulting an antiSemite.
Untrue!
Your posts follow an ugly profile.
Male:
That is just about the limit, Sandra!
How an ex-Jew, who defected to Christianity and now has a guilty conscience, how possibly spout such vile, offensive crap simply beggars belief!
If this “jew” truly took offence then it would be so simply rectified. He explains precisely why and, if it honestly justified, he’d get an apology. End of issue. But THAT is NOT what he was wishing to achieve!

So let’s be honest here Detective. A whole year or more after this all took place, the Metropolitan Police contact you for the purposes of a search and sieze order on the basis of some crime of “offence” because I mistakenly and inadvertently offended (it is alleged) a cyber individual who I have never met and have no interest in meeting who professes to be a jew? While this same individual feigns offence at a number of posts by a few individuals on that messageboard, of which the above is just ONE example?

No Detective, I don’t buy it!

Your “visit” comes just days after I post a Youtube video which exposes Lord Chancellor Ken Clarke as a liar. It comes after a series of blunt email exchanges with my MPs and also a post or two about the SNP and an attack on Alex Salmond while I had also sent that to the Scottish Executive and the SNP directly by email and complained to the Scottish Executive about the borrowing of currency when it is entirely unnecessary.

I honestly think THAT little lot had a lot more to do with it!

So what was I meant to do due to all of the above offending me? Contact the Metropolitan Police and say “Officer, I wish to make a complaint about the Old Testament and generally about all those who adhere to it in their corrupt way as it offends me”?

I take offence at it and I am vocal about it. I do not have an official organisation with $$$ behind it to go after any individuals who take an “anti gentilism” approach to life but I’ll be DAMNED if I’m going to shut up about it when there is no other way of addressing it!

So where is the ANTI GENTILISM league?
“It’s a trick. We always use it!……. they have power and money”

Now, what do you THINK they use that power and money for Detective? Buying sweeties? Or buying politicians?

 

So, it’s like this: I want an apology from every fcuking Rabbi who condones or promotes this type of racist, inhumane FILTH just as I would want an apology from the Pope and every fcuking Priest who has shagged or covered up the sexual abuse of every child. Does expressing the latter make me an “Anti Catholic” just as the former is alleged to make me an “Anti semite”?

You hypocritical, agenda ridden bastards make me sick!

LEARN DETECTIVE MANCHESTER!

Posted in Law by Earthlinggb . on October 23, 2011

HERE IS ANOTHER “ANTI SEMITIC” RANT FROM YOURS TRULY DETECTIVE!

BUT THE “ANTI SEMITISM” (as you are forced to understand it) IS NOT FROM ME BUT FROM JEWS!

WORK IT OUT DETECTIVE!

MEANWHILE, TELL YOUR BOSSES AND THAT STUPID FUCKING JUDICIARY TO SHUT THE FUCK UP WHEN THEY DON’T KNOW WHAT THEY’RE TALKING ABOUT. OR PERHAPS THEY DO KNOW, WHICH IS QUITE FEASIBLE, AND JUST WISH TO SHUT ME UP?

WELL I AIN’T SHUTTING UP FOR PRICKS!

AND AS FOR THE MET POLICE: WELL I BETTER NOT THINK OF ATTENDING A PROTEST AT ANY POINT HUH? OR I MAY JUST END UP LIKE IAN TOMLINSON. MURDERED BY THE STATE IN FACT BECAUSE THE RPICK WHO HIT HIM WAS WORKING IN MUCH THE SAME CAPACITY AS YOU AND, AS YOU KNOW, YOU CAN DO WHATEVER THE FUCK YOU WISH WITH THE BLESSINGS OF THE STATE.

STATE THUGS: PROTECTED WHILE YOU HAVEN’T A FUCKING CLUE HALF THE TIME WHAT AND WHO YOU’RE DOING IT FOR!

SO EITHER CHARGE ME WITH SOMETHING OR TAKE A HIKE AND, BEFORE YOU DO, RETURN MY FUCKING PROPERTY! THIEVING BASTARDS!

But if you DO charge me with something you better be able to back it up in front of an OPEN jury because I refuse to attend ANY and ALL “in camera” summary trial to enable you to HIDE your shit or make excuses that it is not in the “public interest” coz that’s ALL BULLSHIT. Justify logically and be prepared to open it all up to the media and population and allow me to tear your corrupt “law” apart. THEN I’ll attend. But only for the purpose that YOU have my property and I intend getting it back in the same condition in which you STOLE IT!

Further, you bring an INJURED PARTY and if you can’t then all bets are off.

And while you’re at it, tell that Uncle of the paedophile and Mark Lazarowicz from me that they are a couple of paid off, owned, controlled prats who don’t have the mental capacity to fill the roles they are in!

This is getting TEDIOUS Detective. CHARGE ME or return my goods with an expressed apology and we’ll call it quits. After all, you don’t have a fucking clue what you are doing and are just doing as you are told. But NEXT TIME, think before you drill in someone’s door. Oh and another thing, try using the bell/buzzer next time so I know it’s you ok? I don’t like knocks at my door out of the blue when I have a bloody intercom whereby you could have made your presence known. Would have made the drilling unnecessary then don’t you think?

Or did you case the joint beforehand and come to some sort of wild conclusion I may be an armed terrorist?

BLOODY IDIOTS!

By the way Detective Manchester, I’m speaking to you in your CAPACITY as a Police Officer NOT as a bloke, human being, man. Comprende? You might actually be a decent bloke for all I know but as an officer you’re just one of the “Yes sir No Sir” gang.

Have to add though, one of the other guys with you was a little “jerky” let’s say. Was he the one I heard you or someone tell to calm down? :-)

So here’s the list of property you stole:

One desktop PC, including keyboard (but you left monitor and cables)

One Windows laptop

One Macbook (15″ monitor version): Brand new condition in full working order. Including entire music collection, personal legal documentation, movies, my own musical work and includes a music studio which I use a great deal, personal documents, personal photos etc.

One 40GB Hard disk (blue Western Digital) Memory practically full with the above documents etc.

One mobile phone sim card.

One digital  camera memory card.

One Camcorder tape (of your visit).

One Boss 4 track handheld portastudio and MP3 player (including a full audio recording of your visit).

One Sony stereo microphone (why you needed that is anyone’s guess unless you enjoy recording yourself).

Meanwhile, if you suggest you were/are looking for any and all documents or downloaded evidence of somehow proving I am some sort of danger to the community then I wonder why you and your buddies never took masses of files and documents from a cabinet that it seems you did not even search which is FILLED with documents. Any one of which could have had some “hate” literature contained within. Very strange you didn’t bother to go through all that. It would appear, then, that your entire purpose was simply to remove any and all capability I had to express myself.

You think I’m THICK Detective?

Jewish banishment and The “City” of London

Posted in Finance, Political History by Earthlinggb . on February 26, 2011

I think it’s important, for the “naysayers” who visit this blog, that I prologue it with a point re the “Crown of England”. The following is a statement made by Tony Benn in the Houses of Parliament not too many years ago (and it matters not when such was said anyhow). This is very very simple: The British people have no idea who this “Crown” is. It acts outside of any parliamentary scrutiny whatsoever. As such, it acts outwith the law yet decides what this thing called “Law” is!

The Crown prosecutes. Our Armed Forces fight and kill and destroy nations on its say so. Our Police and Forces take an oath to this “thing” called “the Crown”. They believe it to be “Her Majesty” the monarch without understanding at all that the monarchy is NOT a person or the Queen and her family. The Monarchy is a Constitutional Office. When it comes to the profit of the British Queen and her family from the “Crown Estate”, it is, in actual fact, deceptive criminal theft by the “reigning monarch” (like a reigning CEO of a corporation stealing the wealth of the company yet, the person in the office of CEO does not have the legal or lawful entitlement to take the wealth of the company because it is the Corporation in total as a legal person which owns the wealth and NOT the CEO). This is PRECISELY the same when we look at this “Constitutional Monarch” in office profiting no longer from a Civil List but from various sources of the country’s wealth.

Our Armed Forces, Police and judiciary are immensely ignorant but do what they are told otherwise they will not eat. They do as the “Crown” bids simply because, if they question it, then their wealth and the wealth of their family disappears. The Policeman with integrity would be sacked and the soldier fighting for his dearest “Crown” would find himself at the mercy of “friendly fire”.

So, what were those words of Tony Benn which crystallises the seriousness of this issue?

Here they are:

“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.”

tony-benn-the-straight-man

Anyone thinking very logically and simply would simply ask one question:

WHY HAVE JEWS BEEN BANISHED FROM SOME MANY DIFFERENT COUNTRIES AND CULTURES OVER CENTURIES? BY PEOPLES WHO HAVE NEVER HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO CONSPIRE AGAINST THEM BECAUSE OF VAST DISTANCES BETWEEN THE COUNTRIES WHO HAVE BANISHED THEM. YET ALL OF THESE PEOPLES HAVE, AT DIFFERENT TIMES THROUGHOUT HISTORY, FELT IT NECESSARY TO DO JUST THAT. FOR NO REASON? ALL OF THESE CULTURES HAVE JUST HAD SOME RACIAL HATRED OF JEWS? THERE’S NO LOGIC IN IT. THE ONLY COMMON DENOMINATOR WHICH PERMEATES THROUGHOUT THESE BANISHMENTS IS THAT OF MONEY AND USURY.

Henk Ruyssenaars’ article on July 10th 2006 drew attention to the book “Descent into Slavery” by Des Griffin in which the real meaning of the term “City of London” is explained. The following is an excerpt from that article.

“To the majority of people the words “Crown” and “City” in reference to London refer to the queen or the capital of England.

This is not the truth. The “City” is in fact a privately owned Corporation – or Sovereign State – occupying an irregular rectangle of 677 acres and located right in the heart of the 610 square mile ‘Greater London’ area. The population of ‘The City’ is listed at just over four thousand, whereas the population of ‘Greater London’ (32 boroughs) is approximately seven and a half million.

“The Crown” is a committee of twelve to fourteen men who rule the independent sovereign state known as London or ‘The City.’ ‘The City’ is not part of England. It is not subject to the Sovereign. It is not under the rule of the British parliament. Like the Vatican in Rome, it is a separate, independent state.

“The City”, which is often called “the wealthiest square mile on earth,” is ruled over by a Lord Mayor. Here are grouped together Britain’s great financial and commercial institutions: Wealthy banks, dominated by the privately-owned (Rothschild controlled) Bank of England, Lloyd’s of London, the London Stock Exchange, and the offices of most of the leading international trading concerns. Here, also, is located Fleet Street, the heart and core of the newspaper and publishing worlds.

The Lord Mayor, who is elected for a one year stint, is the monarch in the City. As Aubrey Menen says in “London”, Time-Life, 1976, p. 16:

“The relation of this monarch of the City to the monarch of the realm [Queen] is curious and tells much.”
It certainly is and certainly does!
When the Queen of England goes to visit the City she is met by the Lord Mayor at Temple Bar, the symbolic gate of the City. She bows and asks for permission to enter his private, sovereign State. During such State visits

“the Lord Mayor in his robes and chain, and his entourage in medieval costume, outshines the royal party, which can dress up no further than service uniforms.”
The Lord Mayor leads the queen into his city.
The symbolism is clear. The Lord Mayor is the monarch. The Queen is his subject.

The small clique who rule the City dictate to the British Parliament. It tells them what to do, and when. In theory Britain is ruled by a Prime Minister and a Cabinet of close advisers. These ‘fronts’ go to great lengths to create the impression that they are running the show but, in reality, they are mere puppets whose strings are pulled by the shadowy characters who dominate behind the scenes. As the former British Prime Minister of England during the late 1800s Benjamin D’Israeli wrote:

“So you see… the world is governed by very different personages from what is imagined by those who are not behind the scenes”
(Coningsby, The Century Co., N.Y., 1907, p. 233).
This fact is further demonstrated by another passage from Menen’s book:

“The Prime Minister, a busy politician, is not expected to understand the mysteries of high finance, while the Chancellor of the Exchequer is only expected to understand them when he introduces the budget. Both are advised by the permanenet officials of the Treasury, and these listen to the City. If they suspect that some policy of the government will back-fire, it is of no use their calling up British ambassadors to ask if it is so; they can find out more quickly from the City. As one ambassador said: “Diplomats are nowadays no more than office boys, and slow ones at that. The City will know. They will tell the Treasury and the Treasury will tell the Prime Minister.”
Woe betide him if he does not listen. The most striking instance of this happened in recent history. In 1956 the then Prime Minister, Sir Anthony Eden… launched a war to regain the Suez Canal. It had scarcely begun when the City let it be known that in a few days he would have no more money to fight it; the Pound would collapse. He stopped the war and was turned out of office by his party. When the Prime Minister rises to address the Lord Mayor’s banquet, he hopes that the City will put more behind him than the gold plate lavishly displayed on the sideboards.”

The British government is the bond slave of the “invisible and inaudible” force centred in the City. The City calls the tune. The “visible and audible leaders” are mere puppets who dance to that tune on command. They have no power. They have no authority. In spite of the outward show they are mere pawns in the game being played by the financial elite.

It is important to recognise the fact that two separate empires were operating under the guise of the British Empire. One was the Crown Empire and the other the British Empire.

The colonial possessions that were white were under the sovereign – i.e. under the authority of the British government. Such nations as the Union of South Africa, Australia, New Zealand and Canada were governed under British law. These only represented thirteen percent of the people who made up the inhabitants of the Britsh Empire.

All the other parts of the British Empire – nations like India, Egypt, Bermuda, Malta, Cyprus and colonies in Central Africa, Singapore, Hong Kong and Gibraltar were all Crown Colonies. These were not under British rule. The British parliament had no authority over them.

As the Crown owned the committee known as the British government there was no problem getting the British taxpayer to pay for naval and military forces to maintain the Crown’s supremacy in these areas.

The City reaped fantastic profits from its operations conducted under the protection of the British armed forces. This wasn’t British commerce and British wealth. The international bankers, prosperous merchants and those members of the aristocracy who were part of the “City” machine accumulated vast fortunes .

About seventy years ago Vincent Cartwright Vickers stated that :

….”financiers in reality took upon themselves, perhaps not the responsibility, but certainly the power of controlling the markets of the world and therefore the numerous relationships between one nation and another, involving international friendship and mistrusts… Loans to foreign countries are organised and arranged by the City of London with no thought whatsoever of the nation’s welfare but solely in order to increase indebtedness upon which the City thrives and grows rich…”
In “Empire of the City” E. C. Knuth said:

” This national amnd mainly international dictatorship of money which plays off one country against another and which, through ownership of a large portion of the press converts the advertisement of its own private opinion into a semblance of general public opinion, cannot for much longer be permitted to render Democratic Government a mere nickname. Today we see through a glass darkly: for there is so much which it would not be in the public interest to divulge.”…

The battle for power and riches is an ancient one, but any attempt to make sense of the present world situation where the bulk of humanity is being herded like sheep into a corral without some knowledge of history is a difficult if not impossible task.

At present names have been replaced by groups, capitalists, republicans, democrats, terrorists, corporations, NATO, UNO, NAFTA, EMI, ECB, ASEAN. Names that are spewed out like confetti in an endless list of anonymity.

In spite of modern technology the figures in the background remain blurred. Mention the word “Jew” or “Conspiracy” and everyone with few exceptions will turn away. Why? Fear? Of what? What is the magic talisman which makes the mention of these co-religionists a no-go area? Is it because they have infiltrated every aspect of human activity? Is it they who are pulling the strings which are leading the world on its downward slope?

The Jew has been mistrusted since way back. But what is apparent now is that any attempt to offer an answer to the question is clamped down upon. What does that indicate? Above all it indicates that these shadowy figures fear more than anything else the truth.

Professor Jesse H. Holmes, writing in, “The American Hebrew,” expressed the following similar sentiments:

“It can hardly be an accident that antagonism directed against the Jews is to be found pretty much everywhere in the world where Jews and non-Jews are associated. And as the Jews are the common element of the situation it would seem probable, on the face of it, that the cause will be found in them rather than in the widely varying groups which feel this antagonism.
In Europe and Russia alone, the Jews have been banished 47 times in the last 1,000 years: Mainz, 1012; France, 1182; Upper Bavaria, 1276; England, 1290; France, 1306; France, 1322; Saxony, 1349; Hungary, 1360; Belgium, 1370; Slovakia, 1380; France, 1394; Austria, 1420; Lyons, 1420; Cologne, 1424; Mainz, 1438; Augsburg, 1438; Upper Bavaria, 1442; Netherlands, 1444; Brandenburg, 1446; Mainz, 1462; Lithuania, 1495; Portugal, 1496; Naples, 1496; Navarre, 1498; Nuremberg, 1498; Brandenburg, 1510; Prussia, 1510; Genoa, 1515; Naples, 1533; Italy, 1540; Naples, 1541; Prague, 1541; Genoa, 1550; Bavaria, 1551; Prague, 1557; Papal States, 1569; Hungary, 1582; Hamburg, 1649; Vienna, 1669; Slovakia, 1744; Mainz, 1483; Warsaw, 1483; Spain, 1492; Italy, 1492; Moravia, 1744; Bohemia, 1744; Moscow, 1891.

(The above is excerpted from The Synagogue of Satan by Andrew Carrington Hitchcock.)

Of what were these people guilty to arouse such a reaction from so many diverse people?

Well, in England, it’s very interesting:

IT ALL STARTED with The Edict of Expulsion of 1290 AD.
The Jews would have us believe that their expulsion from England by Edward I (reigned 1272-1307) was due to their money lending endeavors. The real reason was due to the Jews’ crime of blood ritual murders.

The Orthodox Christian historian of the 5th Century, Socrates Scholasticus, in his Ecclesiastical History, 7:16, recounts an incident about Jews killing a Christian child:

— “At a place near Antioch in Syria, the Jews, in derision of the Cross and those who put their trust in the Crucified One, seized a Christian boy, and having bound him to a cross they made, began to sneer at him. In a little while becoming so transported with fury, they scourged the child until he died under their hands.” —

Here are a few examples which led to the English expulsion of the Jews in 1290 AD:

1144 A.D. Norwich: A twelve year-old boy was crucified and his side pierced at the Jewish Passover. His body was found in a sack hidden in a tree. A converted Jew to Christianity named Theobald of Cambridge informed the authorities that the Jews took blood every year from a Christian child because they thought that only by so doing could they ever return to Palestine. The boy has ever since been known as St. William.

1160 A.D. Gloucester: The body of a child named Harold was found in the river with the wounds of crucifixion.

1255 A.D. Lincoln: A boy named Hugh was tortured and crucified by the Jews. The boy’s mother found the body in a well on the premises of a Jew named Jopin. 18 Jews were hanged for the crime by King Henry III.

1290 A.D. Oxford: The Patent Roll 18 Of Edward I, 21st June 1290 contains an order for the Gaol delivery of a Jew named Isaac de Pulet for the murder and blood letting of a Christian boy. Only one month after this, King Edward I issued his decree expelling the Jews from England.
(See Sources #1 Below )

[As an addendum to the above, I feel it is necessary to clarify that, before the expulsion in 1290, there was the Statute of the Jewry in 1275, entirely based upon the moneylending and usury issue:  jews1275.html

Now please understand that this is just pure factual history and the pieces fall where they fall.

It seems very obvious to me that, while the Islamic religion has not forgotten one of its fundamental cornerstones: NO USURY, the Christian world simply has. For NO USURY is a cornerstone of the christian religion too. I wonder, then, why Christians call themselves christians? They don't follow Jesus' teachings and haven't done so in the west since the following took place - the readmission of jewish usury into England by Oliver Cromwell during the 1640 - 1660 period and then the establishment of the Bank of England where one can see, William of Orange and his Queen, Mary became original investors - it is on Bank of England documents]

JEWISH BANKERS FROM AMSTERDAM led by the Jewish financier and army contractor of Cromwell’s New Model Army, Fernandez Carvajal and assisted by Portuguese Ambassador De Souza, a Marano (secret Jew), saw an opportunity to exploit in the civil unrest led by Oliver Cromwell in 1643.

A stable Christian society of ancient traditions binding the Monarchy, Church, State, nobles and people into one solemn bond was disrupted by Calvin’s Protestant uprising. The Jews of Amsterdam exploited this civil unrest and made their move. They contacted Oliver Cromwell in a series of letters:

Cromwell To Ebenezer Pratt of the Mulheim Synagogue in Amsterdam,
16th June 1647:
— “In return for financial support will advocate admission of Jews to England: This however impossible while Charles living. Charles cannot be executed without trial, adequate grounds for which do not at present exist. Therefore advise that Charles be assassinated, but will have nothing to do with arrangements for procuring an assassin, though willing to help in his escape.” —

To Oliver Cromwell From Ebenezer Pratt, 12th July 1647:
— “Will grant financial aid as soon as Charles removed and Jews admitted. Assassination too dangerous. Charles shall be given opportunity to escape: His recapture will make trial and execution possible. The support will be liberal, but useless to discuss terms until trial commences.” —

Cromwell had carried out the orders of the Jewish financiers and beheaded, (yes, Cromwell and his Jewish sponsors must face Christ!), King Charles I on January 30 1649.

Beginning in 1655, Cromwell, through his alliance with the Jewish bankers of Amsterdam and specifically with Manasseh Ben Israel and his brother-in-law, David Abravanel Dormido, initiated the resettlement of the Jews in England.
(See Sources #2 Below )

JEWS GET THEIR CENTRAL BANK OF ENGLAND
WILLIAM STADHOLDER, a Dutch army careerist, was a handsome chap with money problems. The Jews saw another opportunity and through their influence arranged for William’s elevation to Captain General of the Dutch Forces. The next step up the ladder for William was his elevation by the Jews to the aristocratic title of William, Prince of Orange.

The Jews then arranged a meeting between William and Mary, the eldest daughter of the Duke of York. The Duke was only one place removed from becoming King of England. In 1677 Princess Mary of England married William Prince of Orange.

To place William upon the throne of England it was necessary to get rid of both Charles II and the Duke of York who was slated to become James II of the Stuarts. It is important to note that none of the Stuarts would grant charter for an English national bank. That is why murder, civil war, and religious conflicts plagued their reigns by the Jewish bankers.

In 1685, King Charles II died and the Duke of York became King James II of England. In 1688 the Jews ordered William Prince of Orange to land in England at Torbay. Because of an ongoing Campaign of L’Infamie against King James II contrived by the Jews, he abdicated and fled to France. William of Orange and Mary were proclaimed King and Queen of England.

The new King William III soon got England involved in costly wars against Catholic France which put England deep into debt. Here was the Jewish bankers’ chance to collect. So King William, under orders from the Elders of Zion in Amsterdam, persuaded the British Treasury to borrow 1.25 million pounds sterling from the Jewish bankers who had helped him to the throne.

Since the state’s debts had risen dramatically, the government had no choice but to accept. But there were conditions attached: The names of the lenders were to be kept secret and that they be granted a Charter to establish a Central Bank of England. Parliament accepted and the Jewish bankers sunk their tentacles into Great Britain.

ENTER THE ROTHSCHILDS
MAYER AMSCHEL BAUER OPENED a money lending business on Judenstrasse (Jew Street) in Frankfurt Germany in 1750 and changed his name to Rothschild. Mayer Rothschild had five sons.

The smartest of his sons, Nathan, was sent to London to establish a bank in 1806. Much of the initial funding for the new bank was tapped from the British East India Company which Mayer Rothschild had significant control of. Mayer Rothschild placed his other four sons in Frankfort, Paris, Naples, and Vienna.

In 1814, Nathanael Rothschild saw an opportunity in the Battle of Waterloo. Early in the battle, Napoleon appeared to be winning and the first military report to London communicated that fact. But the tide turned in favor of Wellington.

A courier of Nathan Rothschild brought the news to him in London on June 20. This was 24 hours before Wellington’s courier arrived in London with the news of Wellington’s victory. Seeing this fortuitous event, Nathan Rothschild began spreading the rumor that Britain was defeated.

With everyone believing that Wellington was defeated, Nathan Rothschild began to sell all of his stock on the English Stock Market. Everyone panicked and also began selling causing stocks to plummet to practically nothing. At the last minute, Nathan Rothschild began buying up the stocks at rock-bottom prices.

This gave the Rothschild family complete control of the British economy – now the financial centre of the world and forced England to set up a revamped Bank of England with Nathan Rothschild in control.
(See Sources #4 Below )

ALL ABOUT THE JEWISH VATICAN
(As much as that is possible given Rothschild secrecy)
A PRIVATE FINANCIAL CORPORATION exists today in England known as “The City.” It is also known as The Jewish Vatican located in the heart of Greater London.

A Committee of 12 men rule The Jewish Vatican. They are known as “The Crown.” The City and its rulers, The Crown, are not subject to the Parliament. They are a Sovereign State within a State.

The City is the financial hub of the world. It is here that the Rothschilds have their base of operations and their centrality of control:

* The Central Bank of England (controlled by the Rothschilds) is located in The City.
* All major British banks have their main offices in The City.
* 385 foreign banks are located in The City.
* 70 banks from the United States are located in The City.
* The London Stock Exchange is located in The City.
* Lloyd’s of London is located in The City.
* The Baltic Exchange (shipping contracts) is located in The City.
* Fleet Street (newspapers & publishing) is located in The City.
* The London Metal Exchange is located in The City.
* The London Commodity Exchange (trading rubber, wool, sugar, coffee) is located in The City.

Every year a Lord Mayor is elected as monarch of The City. The British Parliament does not make a move without consulting the Lord Mayor of The City. For here in the heart of London are grouped together Britain’s financial institutions dominated by the Rothschild-controlled Central Bank of England.

The Rothschilds have traditionally chosen the Lord Mayor since 1820. Who is the present day Lord Mayor of The City? Only the Rothschilds’ know for sure…
(See Sources #5 Below )

Sources #1: Ariel Toaff, Bloody Passover-Jews of Europe and Ritual Homicide, 2007 Click Here; J. C. Cox, Norfolk Churches; Victoria County History of Norfolk, 1906; Arnold Leese, Jewish Ritual Murder In England; Henry III, Close Roll 16; Joseph Haydn, Dictionary of Dates.

Sources #2: Isaac Disraeli, Life of Charles I, 1851; Hugh Ross Williamson, Charles and Cromwell; AHM Ramsey, The Nameless War; Lord Alfred Douglas, Plain English, 1921; Geoffrey H. Smith, The Settlement Of Jews In England

Sources #3: John Harold Wood, History of Central Banking in Great Britain; Gustaaf Johannes Renier, William of Orange

Sources #4: Frederick Morton, The Rothschilds; Benjamin Disraeli, Coningsby

Sources #5: E.C. Knuth, The Empire of The City; Des Griffin, Descent Into Slavery

UPDATE 4 Nov 2011: George Monbiot in the Guardian Newspaper. Although he just doesn’t go quite far enough into the history and the connectivity. Mainstream media now supporting much of the above regarding the “above the law” nature of the City of London. I rest my case your honour!

The medieval, unaccountable Corporation of London is ripe for protest

Working beyond the authority of parliament, the Corporation of London undermines all attempts to curb the excesses of finance.

    • George Monbiot
Daniel Pudles 01112011

Illustration by Daniel Pudles

It’s the dark heart of Britain, the place where democracy goes to die, immensely powerful, equally unaccountable. But I doubt that one in 10 British people has any idea of what the Corporation of the City of London is and how it works. This could be about to change. Alongside the Church of England, the Corporation is seeking to evict the protesters camped outside St Paul’s cathedral. The protesters, in turn, have demanded that it submit to national oversight and control.

What is this thing? Ostensibly it’s the equivalent of a local council, responsible for a small area of London known as the Square Mile. But, as its website boasts, “among local authorities the City of London is unique”. You bet it is. There are 25 electoral wards in the Square Mile. In four of them, the 9,000 people who live within its boundaries are permitted to vote. In the remaining 21, the votes are controlled by corporations, mostly banks and other financial companies. The bigger the business, the bigger the vote: a company with 10 workers gets two votes, the biggest employers, 79. It’s not the workers who decide how the votes are cast, but the bosses, who “appoint” the voters. Plutocracy, pure and simple.

There are four layers of elected representatives in the Corporation: common councilmen, aldermen, sheriffs and the Lord Mayor. To qualify for any of these offices, you must be a freeman of the City of London. To become a freeman you must be approved by the aldermen. You’re most likely to qualify if you belong to one of the City livery companies: medieval guilds such as the worshipful company of costermongers, cutpurses and safecrackers. To become a sheriff, you must be elected from among the aldermen by the Livery. How do you join a livery company? Don’t even ask.

To become Lord Mayor you must first have served as an alderman and sheriff, and you “must command the support of, and have the endorsement of, the Court of Aldermen and the Livery”. You should also be stinking rich, as the Lord Mayor is expected to make a “contribution from his/her private resources towards the costs of the mayoral year.” This is, in other words, an official old boys’ network. Think of all that Tory huffing and puffing about democratic failings within the trade unions. Then think of their resounding silence about democracy within the City of London.

The current Lord Mayor, Michael Bear, came to prominence within the City as chief executive of the Spitalfields development group, which oversaw a controversial business venture in which the Corporation had a major stake, even though the project lies outside the boundaries of its authority. This illustrates another of the Corporation’s unique features. It possesses a vast pool of cash, which it can spend as it wishes, without democratic oversight. As well as expanding its enormous property portfolio, it uses this money to lobby on behalf of the banks.

The Lord Mayor’s role, the Corporation’s website tells us, is to “open doors at the highest levels” for business, in the course of which he “expounds the values of liberalisation”. Liberalisation is what bankers call deregulation: the process that caused the financial crash. The Corporation boasts that it “handle[s] issues in Parliament of specific interest to the City”, such as banking reform and financial services regulation. It also conducts “extensive partnership work with think tanks … vigorously promoting the views and needs of financial services.” But this isn’t the half of it.

As Nicholas Shaxson explains in his fascinating book Treasure Islands, the Corporation exists outside many of the laws and democratic controls which govern the rest of the United Kingdom. The City of London is the only part of Britain over which parliament has no authority. In one respect at least the Corporation acts as the superior body: it imposes on the House of Commons a figure called the remembrancer: an official lobbyist who sits behind the Speaker’s chair and ensures that, whatever our elected representatives might think, the City’s rights and privileges are protected. The mayor of London’s mandate stops at the boundaries of the Square Mile. There are, as if in a novel by China Miéville, two cities, one of which must unsee the other.

Several governments have tried to democratise the City of London but all, threatened by its financial might, have failed. As Clement Attlee lamented, “over and over again we have seen that there is in this country another power than that which has its seat at Westminster.” The City has exploited this remarkable position to establish itself as a kind of offshore state, a secrecy jurisdiction which controls the network of tax havens housed in the UK’s crown dependencies and overseas territories. This autonomous state within our borders is in a position to launder the ill-gotten cash of oligarchs, kleptocrats, gangsters and drug barons. As the French investigating magistrate Eva Joly remarked, it “has never transmitted even the smallest piece of usable evidence to a foreign magistrate”. It deprives the United Kingdom and other nations of their rightful tax receipts.

It has also made the effective regulation of global finance almost impossible. Shaxson shows how the absence of proper regulation in London allowed American banks to evade the rules set by their own government. AIG’s wild trading might have taken place in the US, but the unit responsible was regulated in the City. Lehman Brothers couldn’t get legal approval for its off-balance sheet transactions in Wall Street, so it used a London law firm instead. No wonder priests are resigning over the plans to evict the campers. The Church of England is not just working with Mammon; it’s colluding with Babylon.

If you’ve ever dithered over the question of whether the UK needs a written constitution, dither no longer. Imagine the clauses required to preserve the status of the Corporation. “The City of London will remain outside the authority of parliament. Domestic and foreign banks will be permitted to vote as if they were human beings, and their votes will outnumber those cast by real people. Its elected officials will be chosen from people deemed acceptable by a group of medieval guilds …”.

The Corporation’s privileges could not withstand such public scrutiny. This, perhaps, is one of the reasons why a written constitution in the United Kingdom remains a distant dream. Its power also helps to explain why regulation of the banks is scarcely better than it was before the crash, why there are no effective curbs on executive pay and bonuses and why successive governments fail to act against the UK’s dependent tax havens.

But now at last we begin to see it. It happens that the Lord Mayor’s Show, in which the Corporation flaunts its ancient wealth and power, takes place on 12 November. If ever there were a pageant that cries out for peaceful protest and dissent, here it is. Expect fireworks – and not just those laid on by the Lord Mayor.

Article: corporation-london-city-medieval

Holocaust: 6 million jews??? Where from exactly?

Posted in Political History, Uncategorized by Earthlinggb . on February 3, 2011

RONALD REAGAN: ANTI-SEMITE?

 

 

 

According to the 1930 census, Czechoslovakia had a Jewish population of 356,830

For the Czechs of the Protectorate Bohemia and Moravia, German occupation was a period of brutal oppression. The Jewish population of Bohemia and Moravia (117,551 according to the 1930 census) was virtually annihilated. Many Jews emigrated after 1939; approximately 78,000 were killed. By 1945, some 14,000 Jews remained alive in the Czech lands.
Approximately 144,000 Jews were sent to Theresienstadt concentration camp. Most inmates were Czech Jews. About a quarter of the inmates (33,000) died in Theresienstadt, mostly because of the deadly conditions (hunger, stress, and disease, especially the typhus epidemic at the very end of war). About 88,000 were deported to Auschwitz and other extermination camps. When the war finished, there were a mere 17,247 survivors. There were 15,000 children living in the children’s home inside the camp; only 93 of those children survived.
(Source: Wikipedia)

At the start of World War II, Poland was partitioned between Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union (see: Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact). The war resulted in the death of one-fifth of the Polish population, with 90% or about 3 million of Polish Jewry killed along with approximately 3 million Polish Gentiles (Christians).[10] Although the Holocaust occurred largely in German occupied Poland there was little collaboration with the Nazis by her citizens. Collaboration by individual Poles has been described as smaller than in other occupied countries.[11][12] Statistics of the Israeli War Crimes Commission indicate that less than 0.1% of Polish gentiles collaborated with the Nazis.[13] Examples of Polish gentile attitudes to German atrocities varied widely, from actively risking death in order to save Jewish lives,[14] and passive refusal to inform on them; to indifference, blackmail,[15] and in extreme cases, participation in pogroms staged by the SS. Grouped by nationality, Poles represent the biggest number of people who rescued Jews during the Holocaust.[16][17]

So, according to Wikipedia (a well known Zionist “front”), we have 3 million Polish jews, 357,000 Czech jews, 117,500 Bohemian and Moravian jews and, according to the following news article from Canada in 1938, 300,000 jews in a combined Germany and Austria.

Now, even if we assume every last one of them was exterminated in the “Holocaust” (and let’s just ignore the 3 million “goyim” just in Poland shall we? After all, the Zionists and Israelis do!), I’m sure my arithmetic at school wasn’t THAT bad!

A rough look at the figures gives us 3,770,000 (ASSUMING ALL DIED).

So WHERE does the 6 MILLION figure come from? Did the Nazis find a few million jews just “here and there” walking along the boulevards of Paris or elsewhere? Jewish gypsies perhaps?

No disrespect to a true Jew. THIS is about the lying scum of Zionism!

Was this man anti-semitic?

Posted in Political History by Earthlinggb . on October 6, 2009

 

Do these quotes forever cast the man who stated such into the bowels of hell as some sort of anti-semitic holocaust denier?

Comments please.

“…Lenin was sent into Russia … in the same way that you might send a vial containing a culture of typhoid or of cholera to be poured into the water supply of a great city, and it worked with amazing accuracy. No sooner did Lenin arrive than he began beckoning a finger here and a finger there to obscure persons in sheltered retreats in New York, Glasgow, in Berne, and other countries, and he gathered together the leading spirits of a formidable sect, the most formidable sect in the world … With these spirits around him he set to work with demoniacal ability to tear to pieces every institution on which the Russian State depended.”

and

“(From) the days of Spartacus Weishaupt to those of Karl Marx, to those of Trotsky, Bela-Kuhn, Rosa Luxembourg and Emma Goldman, this world-wide conspiracy … has been steadily growing. This conspiracy played a definitely recognizable role in the tragedy of the French Revolution.
It has been the mainspring of every subversive movement during the nineteenth century; and now at last this band of extraordinary personalities from the underworld of the great cities of Europe and America have gripped the Russian people by the hair of their heads, and have become practically the undisputed masters of that enormous empire.

There is no need to exaggerate the part played in the creation of Bolshevism and in the bringing about of the Russian revolution by these international and for the most part atheistical Jews. It is certainly a very great one; it probably outweighs all others. With the notable exception of Lenin, the majority of the leading figures are Jews.”

Winston Churchill.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 309 other followers