Dr Susan Hopkins: Exposes herself as a liar
Every time you get a yes/no question and you do not answer it yes or no while you keep repeating a ‘mantra’ over and over again when continuously asked the same question: You are a liar by omission. This exposes the sheer deception of a Doctor which the British public are putting their trust and faith in.
The British public really need to understand what it is they are dealing with when it comes to the people they are relying on for honesty because, across the board, no honesty exists. Why? Because, across the board, these people have lied to you from the outset.
Here is Doctor Susan Hopkins:
Bear in mind this woman is getting paid a fortune and is lying to you.
Doctor Susan Hopkins is the Public Health England theme lead for the Innovations in Behaviour Change theme of the HPRU in HCAI and AMR at Imperial College.
So, another Neil Ferguson type: An Imperial College liar.
She is also a SAGE advisor.
Remember this face. I know you’d rather not but if ever the time comes to hold these people to account, she will be one of them as will Jenny Harries the communist.
These are the people who will have attended Prince Charles’ speech in 2015 at the Royal Society where he impressed his worldview on the Doctors and Nurses to treat the planet as a patient. Again, people do not understand what they are dealing with while they line up for the jabs and boosters.
Nothing is actually hidden (except the ‘smoking gun’ admission and why would criminals give you that?). It is all available to be found. You have seen Imperial College’s document on finding a new way to frame “climate change” and why they had to. You have seen, in previous posts, the multitude of documentary evidence showing you they chose to reframe it as a health issue. You have seen all those dictating to you what you must do re masks and lockdowns, social distancing etc all outright lying to you as they break the rules themselves and why? Because they know “Covid” is a non existent, statistical disease being used to create the behaviour change they want to allow significantly greater control over people and their movements and consumption patterns (to ostensibly protect them from the virus but, in reality, it is to meet carbon emission targets over the following 10 to 30 years – 50% reduction by 2030 and 100% by 2050 – “Net zero”).
Those of us who understand this watch you who don’t and we know we cannot get through to you so, in essence, we are allowing you to take those ‘vaccines’ while we know there is a very dark agenda behind them. We’re sorry but what can we do? You won’t listen. You will just revert to ridicule and “Conspiracy theorist” as you listen to the authorities.
One last thing I wish to say to those of you who refuse to listen: ALL of the things they are shutting us unvaccinated out of doing, are things which, in time, they will shut you out of too because, again, it is all to do with carbon emissions and they will have to – at some point in the future – come up with further reasons to convince you that you no longer can participate in such events etc, either.
We know you don’t believe us and, again, you will never listen but I’m just putting it out there so I can turn, in years to come, and say “I told you”.
One final thing however: How many times, recently, have you heard or read “the conspiracy theorists were right again!”?
You see, here is why you have been taught to mock the “conspiracy theorists”. It’s so very easy. We are people (not all I admit. Some are off their rocker and, unfortunately, we then all get tarred by the same brush) who have researched deeply into politics, history and read copious amounts of material (for me, it has been all their own documents and journals plus parliamentary and congressional archives in the main) and, by doing so, can follow the steps they take and have taken; Read between the lines on news items and “pandemics” appearing, apparently, “out of the blue”. We understand what their ultimate purpose is and when you understand that, it is all very easy to follow.
You simply haven’t done that and they don’t want you to. Hence: “Don’t listen to those Conspiracy theorists”. Your ignorance, however, is creating the very conditions you wish to alleviate and maintains the statistical disease which is scaring you. Perhaps you’d rather believe in a statistical disease than face up to what is even scarier for you: A group of people hellbent on controlling you and reducing the world’s population.
What you are experiencing is true terrorism. Not by a fundamental islamist however.
15th January 2003 – Read carefully
Now, I would suggest the reader think about a few things re what they have just read:
- What if there is no “Covid 19” actual spreading virus from early 2020? I have seen no proof of there being such a virus. Yes, I’ve heard the government and yes I’ve heard the media. Yes I have heard people “dying from Covid” on death certificates and people “catching Covid” based on entirely unreliable (and, in the words of the inventor of the PCR test AND Dr Anthony Fauci: It should not be used as a diagnostic at all plus, from Fauci: “It is useless at figures of 40 cycles” yet that is what has been used to get our “positives”). So, here’s the thing: The vast vast majority of people who have died in care homes and elsewhere, during this “pandemic” have been extremely elderly; Have had multiple co-morbidities and, you would have to conclude, their immune systems have been shot to pieces due to their condition. What are the chances that the “Covid vaccine” has presented a far greater danger to them (and, in fact, killed them)?
- “The likelihood of suffering side effects is believed to be significantly higher for those with weakened immune systems than for others.” Have you even heard this being suggested by anyone at all pushing the “Covid vaccines” today? Not a single concern expressed, in any way, regarding how different people with different potential genetic ‘triggers’ or weakened immune systems for any reason, may react differently to being injected with a “vaccine” which didn’t even get the full safety tests of years before being introduced (yet millions are lining up for their third dose). Don’t you find that strange? Just “Get vaccinated or you can no longer operate fully within society”. Sure this is all about your health!
- “Because the virus used in the vaccine is very contagious” it is important for people with immune system problems to stay away from the vaccinated!! Sure, we are told that the “Covid vaccine” has no live virus but it does have the protein and, being mRNA, it has the host create the virus themselves so that their system then generates antibodies to fight it. What if, again, the elderly and the immuno-compromised do not have the capability to generate those antibodies? Your “vaccine” will kill them! And here’s the thing: YOU KNOW IT!
Now let’s turn to the World Economic Forum for some advice shall we? Isn’t it odd that an “Economic forum” covers nearly every single aspect of life on planet earth? I guess they’ll say “Well, everything impacts and comes down to economics”. Yes, ok it does I’m sure but the question is why and for whom?
- It has been 37 years since HIV was first discovered as the cause of AIDS, but there is still no vaccine available against this disease.
- This contrasts with the rapid speed of the COVID-19 vaccine development and distribution.
- According to a professor of pathology, the delay is caused by the ‘remarkable HIV strain diversity and the immune evasion strategies of the virus’.
- In spite of the challenges, scientists are still researching a variety of solutions and have already made progress in the fight against this complex virus.
Smallpox has been eradicated from the face of the Earth following a highly effective, worldwide vaccination campaign. Paralytic poliomyelitis is no longer a problem in the U.S. because of development and use of effective vaccines against the poliovirus. In current times, millions of lives have been saved because of rapid deployment of effective vaccines against COVID-19. And yet, it has been 37 years since HIV was discovered as the cause of AIDS, and there is no vaccine. Here I will describe the difficulties facing development of an effective vaccine against HIV/AIDS.
I am a professor of pathology at the University of Miami Miller School of Medicine. My laboratory is credited with the discovery of the monkey virus called SIV, or simian immunodeficiency virus. SIV is the close monkey relative of the virus that causes AIDS in humans – HIV, or human immunodeficiency virus. My research has contributed importantly to the understanding of the mechanisms by which HIV causes disease and to vaccine development efforts.
HIV vaccine development efforts have come up short
Vaccines have unquestionably been society’s most potent weapon against viral diseases of medical importance. When the new disease AIDS burst onto the scene in the early 1980s and the virus that caused it was discovered in 1983-84, it was only natural to think that the research community would be able to develop a vaccine for it.
At a now famous press conference in 1984 announcing HIV as the cause of AIDS, then U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services Margaret Heckler predicted that a vaccine would be available in two years. Well, it is now 37 years later and there is no vaccine. The rapidity of COVID-19 vaccine development and distribution puts the lack of an HIV vaccine in stark contrast. The problem is not failure of government. The problem is not lack of spending. The difficulty lies in the HIV virus itself. In particular, this includes the remarkable HIV strain diversity and the immune evasion strategies of the virus.
So, should we researchers give up? No, we shouldn’t. One approach researchers are trying in animal models in a couple of laboratories is to use herpes viruses as vectors to deliver the AIDS virus proteins. The herpes virus family is of the “persistent” category. Once infected with a herpes virus, you are infected for life. And immune responses persist not just as memory but in a continually active fashion. Success of this approach, however, will still depend on figuring out how to elicit the breadth of immune responses that will allow coverage against the vast complexity of HIV sequences circulating in the population.
Another approach is to go after protective immunity from a different angle. Although the vast majority of HIV-infected individuals make antibodies with weak, strain-specific neutralizing activity, some rare individuals do make antibodies with potent neutralizing activity against a broad range of HIV isolates. These antibodies are rare and highly unusual, but we scientists do have them in our possession.
Also, scientists have recently figured out a way to achieve protective levels of these antibodies for life from a single administration. For life! This delivery depends on a viral vector, a vector called adeno-associated virus. When the vector is administered to muscle, muscle cells become factories that continuously produce the potent broadly neutralizing antibodies. Researchers have recently documented continuous production for six and a half years in a monkey.
We are making progress. We must not give up.
A few thoughts:
- Why no AIDS vaccine? Perhaps because they never wished to cure it? Why a “Covid vaccine”? Perhaps because it gives you AIDS or, at least, puts the nail in the coffin of all those with compromised immune systems.
- Isn’t it interesting that Margaret Heckler proclaimed there’d be a vaccine for AIDS within 2 years? And then there never was one? Was she that incompetent?
- The point about some individuals making antibodies to the HIV virus with “potent neutralizing activity” then makes the point clear that there are differences between one human and another in their ability to fight off any virus or any disease – again, this points to my previous point about people with different potential genetic ‘triggers’ or weakened immune systems for any reason, may react differently to being injected with a “vaccine” and yet, not a single utterance regarding this from those pushing today’s vaccines.
- Re the last paragraph stating “scientists have recently figured out a way……Researchers have recently documented continuous production for six and a half years in a monkey”. Do keep in mind that the “Covid vaccine” was (they say) developed within months and then administered into human arms within a year of the “outbreak”. You’d think that, with such ‘success’ over 6 and a half years in monkeys producing antibodies which killed HIV, they’d have it developed and administered by now. Why wait 6 and a half years? Safety? 😉 They’ve done more work on HIV than they have in testing the “Covid vaccine”. The HIV one seems to continuously produce the antibodies while they’ve introduced a “Covid vaccine” which can’t even stop transmission at all for any length of time (but they still want to keep pumping it into you).
- What would you rather have a diagnosis for, by your Doctor? AIDS or Covid 19? There’s a question to ask yourself when considering whether to have a Covid shot for a “disease” that has killed next to nobody (if anybody at all) and seems to be promoted by statistics (I call it a “statistical disease”).
The only reason a “Covid vaccine” exists is to inject the disease into you!
As for FFauci:
- “The body does not like to make a good immune response against HIV” – Question: Why would that be? Answer: ?
- HIV is different (somehow). Could that have anything to do with HIV never being a natural virus in the first place? Could it be that the body can’t produce an immune response because HIV is “unnatural”? Could it be that AIDS was and is simply the depletion of the immune system due to other lifestyle factors (like “Covid’s” co-morbidities)?
- “The best way to make a vaccine is to mimic natural infection”. Hmmm. Again, perhaps, HIV is not ‘natural’?
- “With HIV we have to do better than natural infection”. Hmmm. So, the body has to make an even better immune response than it would to natural infection? Natural HIV infection? Why would a body not produce the reaction needed? For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. Why would a sufficient reaction not be enough? That suggests it’s insufficient. It’s like saying you have an army of 10 guys facing your immune army of 10 guys. Your “immune army” fires 10 shots to the head – one for each head of the other side’s army but that is insufficient to kill them. They have bayonets and keep marching toward you and the question is: Do you have time to reload? You fire another 10 shots and still they keep coming. Sounds a little like “Covid” today doesn’t it? How much “better” does that immune response need to be? How long’s a piece of string? So to beat HIV, the body has to produce an immune reaction which is more than necessary to beat the infection? That doesn’t make logical sense unless HIV doesn’t make logical sense either! Sounds to me like he’s suggesting he wants to produce a cytokine storm. If they need to produce an immune reaction even stronger than needed then that simply means they have no clue what they’re dealing with and how strong they need to make that response. But then I’m no virologist and, to be frank, I think the lot of them are full of shit. Do they have a vaccine for that?
The world consistently says it doesn’t trust politicians yet it continues to trust in the “Covid” narrative!
‘Ahh but that’s because I’m listening to the science!’
Well two things moron:
- The Washington State Dept of Health gave you science above. There are many more in the medical journals and academic literature over the years which have told you that, years after a drug or vaccine has been produced, they’ve found it was dangerous. Do you listen to that? Remember, at the time they were launched, the public were told they were amazing, great, just what you need to protect you against X,Y or Z. Just as they’re telling you today while forcing you to get jabbed. Are you nuts? You must be!
- Every single scientist/virologist/epidemiologist/doctor/health minister pushing Covid today rely on politicians and others above politics to fund their lifestyle either by salary, grant funding or their own wish to progress in their chosen field. So you are listening to and trusting politicians. Even the head of the W.H.O is a politician and Bill Gates was never a Doctor!
So, again: Are you nuts? If you are, you should never be allowed on a plane again! People have nut allergies you know!
Dr Alan Cantwell, M.D.full”
Article from Dr Alan Cantwell, M.D. reproduced here
On May 11, 1987, The London Times, one of the world’s most respected newspapers, published an explosive article entitled, “Smallpox vaccine triggered AIDS virus.”
The story suggested the smallpox eradication vaccine program sponsored by the WHO (World Health Organization) was responsible for unleashing AIDS in Africa. Almost 100 million Africans living in central Africa were inoculated by the WHO (World Health Organization). The vaccine was held responsible for awakening a “dormant” AIDS virus infection on the continent.
An advisor to the WHO admitted, “Now I believe the smallpox vaccine theory is the explanation for the explosion of AIDS.”
Robert Gallo, M,D., the co-discoverer of HIV, told The Times, “The link between the WHO program and the epidemic is an interesting and important hypothesis.
I cannot say that it actually happened, but I have been saying for some years that the use of live vaccines such as that used for smallpox can activate a dormant infection such as HIV.” Despite the tremendous importance of this story, the U.S. media was totally silent on the report, and Gallo never spoke of it again.In September 1987, at a conference sponsored by the National Health Federation in Monrovia, California, William Campbell Douglass, M.D., bluntly blamed the WHO for murdering Africa with the AIDS virus.
In a widely circulated reprint of his talk entitled “W.H.O. Murdered Africa” , he accused the organization of encouraging virologists and molecular biologists to work with deadly animal viruses in an attempt to make an immunosuppressive hybrid virus that would be deadly to humans.From the Bulletin of the World Health Organization (Volume 47, p.259, 1972), he quoted a passage that stated: “An attempt should be made to see if viruses can in fact exert selective effects on immune function. The possibility should be looked into that the immune response to the virus itself may be impaired if the infecting virus damages, more or less selectively, the cell responding to the virus.”
According to Douglass, “That’s AIDS. What the WHO is saying in plain English is Let’s cook up a virus that selectively destroys the T-cell system of man, an acquired immune deficiency.'” The entire article can be read on google.com (“WHO Murdered Africa”).In his 1989 book, ‘AIDS: The End of Civilization,’ Douglass claims the WHO laced the African vaccines. He blames “the virologists of the world, the sorcerers who brought us this ghastly plague, and have formed a united front in denying that the virus was laboratory-made from known, lethal animal viruses. The scientific party line is that a monkey in Africa with AIDS bit a native on the butt. The native then went to town and gave it to a prostitute who gave it to a local banker who gave it to his wife and three girl friends, and wham – 75 million people became infected with AIDS in Africa. An entirely preposterous story.
Medical communism via a needle
“We have lived our lives by the assumption that what was good for us would be good for the world. We have been wrong. We must change our lives so that it will be possible to live by the contrary assumption, what is good for the world will be good for us. And that requires that we make the effort to know the world and learn what is good for it.” Wendell Berry, From The Long-Legged House (1969)
The Rockefeller Foundation–Lancet Commission on Planetary Health first met in Bellagio, Italy, in July, 2014. Chaired by Andy Haines of the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, the Commission is a diverse group of global experts in environmental health, medicine, biodiversity, and ecology who reached a powerful consensus around key messages and the urgency of planetary health as an idea in jeopardy. The Commission’s report outlines three challenges that must be addressed to enhance human health in the face of unprecedented environmental challenges.
First, a conceptual challenge to account for the future health and environmental harms to development and prosperity that many countries face. Second, knowledge and information challenges, including lack of transdisciplinary research and a failure to identify the social and environmental drivers of ill health. Finally, governance challenges.
Planetary health is a new science that is only beginning to draw the coordinates of its interests and concerns. It demands new coalitions and partnerships across many different disciplines to meet the pervasive knowledge failures identified by this Commission. It demands new attention to governance and implementation. And, perhaps most of all, it demands more creative imagination among scientists and practitioners working in health—redefining the meaning of human progress, rethinking the possibilities for human cooperation, and revitalising the prospects for the health of human civilisations.
We thank The Rockefeller Foundation for their generous financial support to The Rockefeller Foundation–Lancet Commission on Planetary Health and for hosting meetings in Bellagio, Italy, and New York, USA. We thank Andy Haines for his chairing of the Commission and Sarah Whitmee for her lead authorship. We thank Tim Shorten for project management of the Commission and Micheline Kennedy of GMMB for leading communications around global launches. We thank Commissioners for their commitment to this Commission report and its dissemination, and peer reviewers for their thoughtful contributions to the process. We also thank the participants of The Rockefeller–Economist Visionaries Unbound Planetary Health workshop for providing Commissioners with a broad background discussion to focus the first Commissioners meeting.
Steve Baker: ‘Rules’
One of the “angry conservatives” but, as you can hear, he’s simply angry that Boris was caught out flaunting the rules. He doesn’t question the rules. Everyone should follow the rules.
But what IF, Steve, there should be no rules to follow?
Never, will any of these “rebels” question or even allow a dialogue regarding the reality of “Covid 19”. The cult of “Covid 19” is too high up the chain way above their pay grade. Again, like debating masks and vaccine rollouts etc etc, they can and will debate parties in No.10 etc but never will they allow, or enter into any debate on the fundamental: “Does Covid exist?” because then their career is over. Then they are demonised. Then, if they are influential enough (which none of them are), their life is on the line.
Do not, ever, suggest to me that there is one British MP we can trust and who has balls. They’re all parliamentary eunuchs.
Steve, nor Desmond, nor any of them will ever dare to have a conversation based on the above tweets. Neither will they come under pressure by the public to have these conversations because the public read them and think “WTF?” The public have zero understanding of what these mean and how they connect.
The public think there is a virus because “there can’t not be”. The idea of an immensely monstrous lie being promulgated by their government cannot be entertained in their little heads.
So, on top of throwing stuff at Baker on twitter – a complete and utter waste of time – I send yet another email to John Lamont MP (another waste of time sent to a waste of space):
Plan B & Plan C: If ONLY the hospitality sector would listen!!
All I ask is that you please consider sharing this video wherever and with whoever possible. I created it earlier this year and, of course, my entire youtube channel was then shut down not long afterward. I cannot, for the life of me, understand how people in this industry can watch and listen and not grasp what is going on.
The Alcohol/Hospitality carbon attack: https://s3.wasabisys.com/billgateswantstokillus.com/index.html#/videos/Earthling/OPEN_YOUR_PUBS_BARS_AND_RESTAURANTS-XN3DOyDZME4
Email to the “angry conservatives”.
Don’t think for a minute these people will ever, truly, challenge the system or the accepted wisdom. They won’t. They’re mice, not men.
The blog referred to: https://earthlinggb.wordpress.com/2021/11/17/the-nexus-a-full-explanation-of-the-construction-of-covid/
Depopulation underpins everything.
People just seem to refuse to listen no matter what you present to them. The detail you go into and the time you take to explain makes not one iota of a difference. They simply refuse to believe it. Yet, even when it is not hidden and ‘they’ come right out and say it, STILL they will wear their masks and take their shots. They STILL think Climate Change and Covid are two entirely different issues, even now.
One really loses one’s faith in human intelligence. Why, I may say (no excuse meant) I sometimes lose my cool in my writing and ‘lash out’ at what I consider the morons and the intellectually ‘infirm’. It is because of them, I and all you who know, are tearing our hair out (and I don’t have much left as it is!).
Democracies work so well for the tyrannical because democracies are composed of a “bathtub” of intellect. The average intellect is considered to be ‘100’ which means 50% of the world’s population has less than average intelligence. I’m not even happy with ‘100’. I don’t think you’re what one would consider of decent intellect until you’re at about ‘120’. That said, does it even come down to intellect as we measure it? there are PhDs out there who have bought into this shit! That’s what astonishes me even more and leaves me speechless. “What can be wrong with this bugger’s brain?” I end up asking myself.
She speaks of the population 500 years ago. In the year 1500, the approximate population of the earth was 500 million. This is a figure which has been spoken of by many (and the Georgia Guidestones) as the optimum population.
What does it take to ‘wake’ people up?
I think (am sure) the one thing that stops people from understanding any of this is that they don’t/can’t observe it from the perspective of there being a group of very powerful people who want to inherit the earth and are willing to kill (not through war) to achieve a depopulation of the planet. They just can’t fathom that such people exist because they have not read the history of these people and their philosophy. You will never get through to most because most simply will not take this as even possible, yet it is so simple.
Have you ever been at an event of some kind or lived somewhere and found yourself being surrounded by what you considered ‘riff raff”? Be honest, now. You ‘dehumanise’ them in your mind and you feel justified in doing so due to their actions and, possibly, language. Imagine you had the power to remove them all (in some way) so you may continue to live in your area or enjoy the event on your terms.
Now apply that to the world where the world is THEIR turf and most of the 7 billion of us are the “riff raff”. That’s it in a nutshell. It’s that simple and that real.
The Pandemic Crystal Ball
Who knows how ‘prestigious’ (and in the know) Foreign Policy journal is? And who knows of its connection to the Council on Foreign Relations and, therefore, to the RIIA (or “Chatham House”)?
Here: In your face 20th September 2019. Written one month before Event 201.
But you don’t read these things, do you? You don’t know what these institutions are. You didn’t even know they existed!
So, to all you dismissives out there: Explain it (logically). Can’t wait to hear it!
But I already know what so many of you will say: “Just coincidental timing since people have been speaking about a pandemic event for years now. It just means these guys were the most recent to write about it before it happened!” Or you’ll think “Ah but these are very smart people who can extrapolate extremely well”. But all your justification is just due to your unwillingness to face a far darker but far more likely explanation.
I say read my previous posts showing how, over the past decade or two, they have desperately rewritten the narrative of climate change and fed it into the public consciousness as a health threat. I say that the writing and fear mongering of these others talking about an ‘impending pandemic’ has been purposefully driven by that need to rewrite the climate change narrative. One article in a newspaper somewhere, at some point, doesn’t quite achieve it! It needs to be seeded and then fed over time to grow it and make the narrative live and be viable!
“A new independent report, compiled at the request of the United Nations secretary-general”.
Well his “independent report” told him what he wanted to hear from the ‘crystal ball’ just as his IPCC ‘independent’ scientists tell him what he wants to hear about global temperatures.
The original article: https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/09/20/the-world-knows-an-apocalyptic-pandemic-is-coming/
Blair’s job: Pushing Prince Philip’s Global Eco-Fascism
Copied and reprinted from EIR (Executive Intelligence Review) July 1997….. (originally titled: “Tinny Blair Blares For Prince Philip’s Global Eco-Fascism”)
This report is intended to update the story, and to situate the recent public launching of a series of flagrantly pro-genocide organizations in Canada, the United States, and Britain, that are flooding the Internet with propaganda advocating the elimination of 80% of the human race over the next one to two generations.
You cannot read this and not recognise that it was prescient in its content. I’d say “eerily so” but eerily suggests it’s just luck somehow. It’s not luck, it’s the recognition of the agenda.
The British monarchy’s newly installed mouthpiece, British Prime Minister Tony Blair, has wasted no time in launching the latest phase of the Club of the Isles’ drive to reduce world population by 80%, and impose a “green” feudal world order throughout the planet. After successfully wrecking the June 20-22 Summit of the Eight in Denver, Colorado, with a combination of temper tantrums and clever ploys that set his European cohorts against the host government of President Bill Clinton, Blair moved on to New York City, where he addressed the United Nations “Earth Summit II” on June 23. In his speech, and in a follow-up press statement by his Foreign Secretary Robin Cook, the Blair government made it clear that London still considers the very existence of the United States to be a grave insult to the Empire, and that it intends to use an array of pseudo-scientific hoaxes to bring the United States to its knees.
Blair assailed the Clinton administration for failing to capitulate to Prince Philip’s global eco-fascist apparatus, and vowed that Britain will “take the point” in ramming through a series of United Nations ecological conventions and treaties that, taken as a whole, will drive the world economy back to the Stone Age. In the same breath that he was lambasting President Clinton for failing to buy into the green agenda, he lavished praise on his own predecessor, the Tories’ former Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, for her sterling efforts on behalf of “the environment.”
The British press made no secret of Blair’s “Green Crusade” against the United States. Beneath a banner headline, on the day of Blair’s UN speech, the London Guardian proclaimed that Blair’s address would be a “thinly disguised attack on America,” for failing to curb so-called greenhouse gas emissions. On the same day, the London Times headlined its coverage, “Summit Clash Between the European Union and the United States,” over the environment.
Blair and Cook prominently flaunted their commitment to forcing a “radical change in lifestyles”–a euphemism for murderous austerity–in accordance with the morass of “global warming,” “ozone hole,” and related anti-science ecology hoaxes. During the Denver summit, Cook, according to the London Daily Telegraph of June 23, had singled out the United States as the worst offender, stating: “At the moment, the biggest single problem is that the American public has not yet grasped, that if it continues with its present lifestyle, then it is going to make it impossible for its children or grandchildren to enjoy the kind of environment, and therefore the kind of lifestyle that the Americans have today.”
Here is an excerpt from the New York Times reporting on the summit:
Paradoxically, the same City of London press shamelessly lied, in attempting to simultaneously paint Tony Blair and Bill Clinton as “two peas in a pod,” who have revitalized the badly damaged Anglo-American “special relationship.” On June 24, the London Times, which had reported on the transatlantic rift in Denver (but omitting the fact that Blair had created it), lied that the personal relationship between Clinton and Blair has become so tight, that Blair has been designated as the “linkman” between Washington and continental Europe.
Indeed, one of the reasons that the Queen’s Privy Council had hand-picked Blair as John Major’s successor, was to soften up President Clinton for the kill. So far, British media lies aside, that effort has been a thorough flop. In Denver, President Clinton barely made time to confer with Blair, while he devoted most of his time on June 20 to long private sessions with several other summit partners, especially Russian President Boris Yeltsin. And when he did briefly sit down in private with Blair, the sole topic of discussion was the situation in Northern Ireland, which has been a sore point in Washington-London relations ever since President Clinton came into office vowing to mediate a settlement of the long-standing crisis. And, in what was publicly explained away as a minor logistical gaffe, there was no chair set out for Blair at the opening heads of state banquet later that evening.
Blair’s filthy efforts in Denver and New York City were not lost on EIR contributing editor Lyndon LaRouche, who, in response to the report that Blair intends to demand enactment of a binding 10% reduction in so-called “greenhouse gases” at the upcoming UN Climate Control Convention in Kyoto, Japan in December, said on June 27, “If Blair were sincere about the emission of noxious gases, he would travel less and stop talking more.” He further commented on Blair in an interview with the weekly “EIR Talks” international radio broadcast of June 24: “Look behind the mask, at the reality. Don’t say, `He’s the new bright guy in the neighborhood.’… He’s not. He’s a nasty reptile, and the sooner that the United States realizes that, the better policymaking will go.”
EIR called the shots
Blair’s public performance in Denver and New York City should come as no surprise to regular readers of EIR. For more than a year, this magazine has been writing about the British monarchy’s plans to dump the thoroughly used-up John Major and install a new prime minister, cut in the image of Ramsay MacDonald, the Depression-era prime minister who forged a national unity regime involving his Labour Party, the Conservatives, and the Liberals, with strong, albeit informal support from the British Union of Fascists.
In fact, the principal distinction between the “thoroughly modern” “Tinny” Blair and Ramsay MacDonald is that, today, as the result of a 35-year effort, personally led by Prince Philip and his Dutch counterpart, Prince Bernhard, a worldwide eco-fascist structure is already well-entrenched throughout the globe, particularly within the British Commonwealth, and in the United Nations, the World Bank, and the International Monetary Fund bureaucracies, whose stated purpose is to carry out levels of population genocide that would make Adolf Hitler’s crimes pale by comparison.
EIR first documented the role of Prince Philip as the “new Hitler” in “The Coming Fall of the House of Windsor,” on Oct. 28, 1994. Since then, EIR has published a series of in-depth stories, detailing aspects of the global eco-fascist apparatus and its links to the London-headquartered Club of the Isles financial oligarchy. This report is intended to update the story, and to situate the recent public launching of a series of flagrantly pro-genocide organizations in Canada, the United States, and Britain, that are flooding the Internet with propaganda advocating the elimination of 80% of the human race over the next one to two generations.
Her Majesty’s Royal Virus
It is no exaggeration that the Prince Philip- and Prince Bernhard-led worldwide ecology movement is devoted to mass genocide–not to saving dolphins and defenseless furry creatures. Take the British Royal Consort at his own words.
In August 1988, in an interview with Deutsche Presse-Agentur, Prince Phi lip stated:
“In the event that I am reincarnated, I would like to return as a deadly virus, in order to contribute something to solve overpopulation.”
Earlier, in the foreword to his 1986 book If I Were an Animal, Prince Philip wrote:
“I just wonder what it would be like to be reincarnated as an animal whose species had been so reduced in numbers that it was in danger of extinction. What would be its feelings toward the human species whose population explosion had denied it somewhere to exist…. I must confess that I am tempted to ask for reincarnation as a particularly deadly virus.”
While there is no evidence that Prince Philip has yet been reincarnated thusly, there is ample evidence that the British Royal Consort and de facto chief operations officer of the London-centered Club of the Isles, has devoted the last 36 years of his life to death and destruction, beginning with his 1961 founding of the World Wildlife Fund (WWF), now known as the World Wide Fund for Nature.
Prince Philip’s principal collaborators in launching the WWF as a funding and worldwide operations arm of the International Union for the Conservation of Nature, were Sir Julian Huxley and Max Nicholson, both ardent advocates of eugenics and racial purification. In fact, Huxley was president of the Eugenics Society when he co-founded the WWF. First, as head of the United Nations Educational, Social and Cultural Organization (Unesco), and later as a WWF founder, Huxley preached the need to revive race science and the urgent mission of “culling the human herd”–particularly of the darker-skinned races of Africa and South America. In the founding document of Unesco, Huxley had frankly acknowledged the difficulties he would encounter in reviving eugenics, in light of the Nazi genocide. “Even though it is quite true that any radical eugenic policy will be for many years politically and psychologically impossible,” he wrote, “it will be important for Unesco to see that the … public mind is informed of the issues at stake so that much that now is unthinkable may at least become thinkable.”
The method Huxley and others devised for forcing people to “think the unthinkable,” was to replace the idea of eugenics with the idea of environmentalism. Huxley, Prince Philip, and the others, however, understood that, in their way of thinking, the two terms were interchangeable. During a 1960 tour of Africa, on the eve of the launching of the WWF, Huxley openly boasted that the ecology movement would be the principal weapon used by the British oligarchy to impose a Malthusian world order over the dead body of the nation-state system, and, most importantly, the United States.
It is no coincidence, in the context of Huxley’s remarks, that the man who helped found the Canadian branch of Prince Philip’s WWF, Maj. Louis Mortimer Bloomfield, would be implicated by New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison in the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. Bloomfield, the wartime liaison of the British Special Operations Executive (SOE) to FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover, ran the Montreal-based Permindex Corporation, the entity identified in the Garrison investigation as the hands-on controller of the Kennedy assassination plot.
The 1001 Club and Other Eco-Fascist Fronts
To further spread the work of the WWF, in 1970, Prince Philip teamed up with a former SS officer, Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands, already a prominent player in the WWF, to create a permanent funding mechanism for the growing number of ecology fronts being spawned, to scoop up the dregs of the late-1960s counterculture, and deploy them as the storm-troopers of the new “green” fascism.
The 1001: A Nature Trust, known among its members as the “1001 Club,” was created as an adjunct to Prince Bernhard’s well-known Bilderberg Group, the Cold War-era secret society of leading North American and European oligarchical insiders–1,001 close personal associates of Prince Bernhard and Prince Philip were “invited” to join the 1001 Club at an initial fee of $10,000 per person.
The bulk of the members were drawn from the boards of directors of the leading Club of the Isles raw materials cartels, banks, insurance companies, and family trusts (the fondi). Typical of this caste were John Loudon, former CEO of Royal Dutch Shell and chairman of Shell Oil Co., who served from 1977 until his death as president of the WWF; Maurice Strong, head of the Canada-based Power Corporation, and one of the most important of the WWF operators; Baron Aubrey Buxton of Alsa, of Barclays Bank; Bertold Beitz, director of Alfred Krupp von Bohlen and Halbach Foundation; Conrad Black, chairman of Britain’s leading media cartel, the Hollinger Corporation; Peter Cadbury, of the George Cadbury Trust; Anton Rupert, of the South African Rembrandt tobacco interests; Sir Kenneth Kleinwort, owner of Kleinwort Benson, one of Britain’s oldest investment banks; and Henry Keswick, chairman of Jardine Matheson and brother of John Keswick, the chairman of Hambros Bank and a director of the Bank of England.
Maj. Louis Mortimer Bloomfield was a 1001 Club charter member, as were a number of notorious scoundrels, including swindler-bankers Robert Vesco and Edmond Safra.
By the time Princes Philip and Bernhard had assembled the $10 million war-chest, the first of the leading eco-fascist front groups and think-tanks had already been launched. In 1969, a Sierra Club official, David Ross Brower, founded Friends of the Earth, which, several years later, would help spawn such overtly terrorist groups as Greenpeace and Earth First!. The same year, WWF Chairman Sir Peter Scott launched Survival International, originally known as the Primitive Peoples Fund, which, three years later, spawned Cultural Survival.
In 1968, Aurelio Peccei, a former executive of Fiat (Fiat President Gianni Agnelli was a charter member of the 1001 Club), founded the Club of Rome, another by-invitation-only organization, to peddle a new, computer-age brand of Malthusianism. In 1970, with a grant from the Volkswagen Foundation, Peccei hired Massachusetts Institute of Technology computer whiz-kid Jay Forrester, and a team of his students, to prepare a report on the world population crisis, which was published several years later under the title Limits to Growth. Using a fraudulent concept of “carrying capacity” that completely ruled out human scientific discovery, Forrester and his students, Dennis and Donella Meadows, claimed that a combination of overpopulation and resource depletion would wreck the planet. The Club of Rome became not only a leading “establishment” lobby for every wacky environmental hoax; it launched the zero population growth movement, which has now devolved into a demand for drastic world population reduction–i.e., genocide.
“Ah love! Could thou and I with fate conspire,
to grasp this sorry scheme of things entire,
would not we shatter it to bits and then,
remould it nearer to the heart’s desire.”
Club of rome: “The First Global Revolution”
We are presently seeing the “shatter it to bits” phase while we are being told that the “remoulding” phase is called “Build Back Better”.
During the same build-up phase, Ford Foundation President McGeorge Bundy launched a joint project with the Soviet government, the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA), headquartered in Laxenburg, Austria, to begin the process of peddling the radical ecology, zero-growth mania into the Warsaw Pact. By the time that Mikhail Gorbachov came to power in the Kremlin in 1985, a whole segment of the Soviet nomenklatura had turned from “red” to “green.”
Kissinger’s NSSM-200
With the drug-rock-sex countercultural “paradigm shift” under way, in the early 1970s Prince Philip’s minions launched a string of publicity stunts to accelerate the recruitment to their top-down irrationalist movement. In 1970, Maurice Strong sponsored Earth Day, to place a spotlight on the WWF agenda. In 1972, in Stockholm, Strong organized a United Nations conference on the environment, which further accelerated the proliferation of unscientific hoaxes. Out of that conference, the UN launched the United Nations Environmental Program (UNEP), whose first director was Strong. In 1974, another UN conference, on population, took place in Bucharest, Romania, in which the same cast of characters, using the Club of Rome’s Malthusian propaganda, openly advocated population control.
By this time, Kissinger, the self-confessed agent of the British Crown, was deeply ensconced in both the White House and the State Department, serving simultaneously as national security adviser and secretary of state under Presidents Nixon and Ford. On Dec. 10, 1974, Kissinger wrote National Security Study Memorandum 200 (NSSM-200), “Implications of Worldwide Population Growth for U.S. Security Overseas Interests,” in which he singled out 13 nations for drastic population reduction, in order to secure the uninterrupted flow of vital raw materials to the United States and its allies.
In the 23 years since Kissinger inserted Prince Philip’s genocidal agenda into the U.S. national security doctrine, the World Wildlife Fund and its extended eco-fascist apparatus has been responsible for unprecedented levels of genocide in Africa, Ibero-America, and other vulnerable spots on the planet.
A New Phase Today
In EIR’s “The Coming Fall of the House of Windsor” report, we exposed the direct hand of the WWF in triggering the outbreak of “tribal” warfare in the Great Lakes region of Central Africa. Nearly three years later, that genocide continues unabated. As you will read in this present report, one of the architects of the mass killing, Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni, is a prominent figure in the WWF apparatus, hob-nobbing with Maurice Strong protèé and current World Bank President James Wolfensohn, and chairing one of the leading ecology “study projects,” 2020 Vision.
As part of the depopulation and chaos fostered by Prince Philip’s green legions, has come the biggest raw materials grab in modern history–led by the Club of the Isles cartels. In effect, Prince Philip, his underling Tony Blair, et al. have launched a new British imperial revival, modeled on the eighteenth- and nineteeth-century British East India Company, with its private armies, and its corporate sovereignty over large tracts of land, ripped from the hands of nation-states. Today, relics of the heyday of the British Empire, such as Crown Associates and the Corps of Commissionaires, are directly running the affairs of state for such London puppets as Museveni, and are deploying private armies made up of “former” British SAS officers, now employed by companies such as Executive Outcomes, Defense Systems, Ltd., KAS, KMS, etc. Under the new imperial mandate, the agenda is now explicitly the depopulation of the globe.
Barry the Bullshitter!
Meet Barry.
Barry is the biggest bullshitting prick on Planet Earth. I say that because I don’t think he can be stupid for, if he is, then he is the most monumentally stupid prick on Planet Earth!
Barry wears his hair in an ‘Einsteinian” fashion to make himself appear intellectual. Barry is an intellectual! But I’m about to explain why that word doesn’t account for much.
Barry is an Emeritus Professor at the London School of Economics (‘Emeritus’ meaning retired. Past his sell by date). Barry really is a ‘useless eater’.
Before getting into the “meat” however, let me make sure you’re acquainted with the LSE: London School of Economics. All you need to know in a nutshell.
Now, I know you’ll wonder at the following and why I include it. Well it’s simply because this literature and other media would not have references to the LSE as they do unless they had their basis in fact and those who are in the know would pick up on the “in jokes”.
Then you have this guy who is a “God” to those in the LSE. So, from terrorists to financial terrorists who wish to restructure society, the LSE has them all!
And no, your majestic one, the LSE would have never seen it coming as I will soon explain!
Ok. Now back to Barry and his arbitrary dispensary of dysentery…
Barry is the ‘father’ (or one of them) of “Securitisation theory” which readers of my blog will be well acquainted with by now.
A fundamental tenet of Securitisation theory, within the sphere of International Relations (IR) is:
“A ‘threat’ can be socially constructed by a ‘Speech Act’ given by a perceived authority figure, figures or institution and, if successfully transmitted/broadcast such that the ‘audience’ accepts it, it can be considered ‘securitised’. This ‘securitisation’ of the threat however, does not mean that there exists an actual, objective threat. The ‘threat’ need not be real but simply accepted as a threat by the audience which, usually in such circumstances, will trust the authority.”
Here is an article written for “International Affairs” (Chatham House) in September 2019. It is clear and precise.
This process follows the securitizing logic of the Copenhagen School,7 according to which any issue can be perceived as a security threat ‘not necessarily because a real existential threat exists but because the issue is presented as a threat’ to a receptive audience.8 Thus, the key to this understanding of health securitization is not the actual ‘threat’ of a pathogen but a successful speech act or narrative ‘through which an intersubjective understanding is constructed within a political community to treat something as an existential threat to a referent object by a securitising actor, [generating] endorsement of emergency measures beyond the rules that would otherwise bind’,9 or a suspension of so-called ‘normal politics’.
I really do not know how to make this clearer to people.
Please read the segment in bold, above, again and again, if need be, until it sinks in.
“any issue can be perceived as a security threat ‘not necessarily because a real existential threat exists but because the issue is presented as a threat’ to a receptive audience.”
“Intersubjective” means an agreed and accepted understanding between people (the Actor and his audience). Each individual being a ‘subject’ so “intersubjective”.
“Referent object” is the object under threat. i.e. in the case of a pathogen, the population.
Now, to drill this “it need not be a real threat” home: You will remember the 2003 Invasion of Iraq and Tony Blair’s “dodgy dossier”. I intend to post. something on that later but the reader should note that the steps taken by Blair in the run up to the Iraq war, were securitisation moves. It was, ultimately, successful in that he got his war but, while the parliamentary audience approved the war, the public did not. As it turned out, there were no WMDs at all! A ‘constructed threat’ by Blair and his ‘speech acts’ to an audience composed of the UK Parliament and the wider public. The public were not on his side (although, to a degree, accepted Saddam was a ‘bad man’) and Blair’s and the Parliament’s ignorance of the public in this securitisation, led to Blair being depised and called a war criminal.
Echoes, then, of today. Yes, overall, today’s public appear to support the securitisation of Covid 19 (if we believe what we hear, read and see in media) but the public are losing faith and patience as more and more are waking up to the totalitarian regime, or structure, which is being put in place with Covid as the excuse. Again, ‘we’ accepted the fundamental: There were WMDs – sorry, I mean “Covid 19”. That acceptance is all they need. You can debate vaccines and who gets them and masks and social distancing etc etc etc all you wish but the sheer fact you’ve accepted there is a real virus is all they need.
Ok. Back to Barry:
Don’t simply assume Barry is just some old, retired LSE professor. You’d be seriously underestimating his influence. See here:
And here:
No need to watch the entire lectures. The above are just to demonstrate who he speaks to and if you wish to hear him speak on the New Global Order to a military audience, by all means do so.
But, to get right to the crux of this post:
Barry Buzan, together with Ole Weaver and Japp De Wild, is a “founding father” of securitisation theory. Do not be confused by the word “theory” in this case. Securitisation ‘theory’ simply describes the happenings, events, speech and reactions to those who wish to construct a threat (particularly an “existential threat”) and achieve ‘buy in’ to the reality of that threat by the audience being told it is a threat. In the case of Climate Change and Covid 19, the audience is us, the global population.
The referent object in the case of Covid, is the global population. The referent object in the case of climate change is not the earth itself but, really, the balance of life within the biosphere since, the story goes, if the seas rise, the ice caps melt, the temperature rises and there is an increase in infectious diseases (the latter coming to the fore in the ‘story’ just over the recent decade) then animals, plants and human life are all at risk. That is the ‘story’.
So Barry knows all of this. He understands that the construction of any threat to be securitised need not be a real threat at all. However Barry and his crowd of academics (and students) have bought into the climate change/sustainability agenda hook, line and sinker. Therefore, to raise the idea that Covid is simply the climate catalyst to Barry and his ‘army’, is akin to heresy. They cannot acknowledge this because they want the results (i.e. significantly increased momentum of the climate agenda) of what Covid has provided.
So, because of his own philosophy and politics and people who share such views, even if they know or suspect that Covid is fake and has been constructed as a threat while being no threat at all, they must hold the idea that it is, in fact, real because it entirely supports their climate change agenda and their wishes. It is similar with Dr Colin Alexander, whom I previously posted about. His University (just like Barry’s and Imperial College and most, if not all, others) support and promote the SDGs (Sustainable Development Goals). To support them, they have to justify that support. The justification is we have the threat of global warming/climate change. For someone like me to come along and say the threat is fake and has been catalysed by another fake called Covid, is anathema to them. Acknowledgement of my ‘thesis’, or even consideration of it, would have these people jumping through hoops to try and support their theses and discount my thesis at the same time.
So, here we have Barry making some points on climate change at an ‘event’ hosted at the LSE last week and which I ‘attended’ by Zoom. He can’t see the wood for the trees! I ask a question but they dare not ‘table’ it….
LSE Event video: https://odysee.com/@Earthling:5/buzan:4?r=Ca93BhvPPjvSC6LxPus5591n3dKrfYAf
Imperative you listen to it all but note at 10.19: “Preferably involving the deaths of a lot of rich people”.
If you or I were to write this on a post on. twitter or facebook/instagram etc, what do you think the outcome might be? But a lefty academic, paid by these rich people (indirectly he is) because he is promoting the right causes, can come right out and say it. However, let’s hear the names Barry. Let’s hear the names in your head. You sickening, delusional old bastard.
“Darling, there’s an elephant in our front lounge!”
Barry: “Oh don’t be such a Conspiracy theorist dear!”
“You’re one to talk! Jabbering on about non existent threats!”
Barry’s controlled by his own self importance and by the wish to maintain his ‘tenure’ and gravitas within the world of academia and he knows that, while he will speak, objectively, about securitisation and that there need be no real ‘threat’ involved, he dare not speak subjectively about that securitisation process being applied to his pet ‘love’ of Sustainability and climate change or of Covid 19 and demonstrating that the ‘threats’ in these two instances are fraudulently constructed. He would never get his paid invites back to the LSE, to the Middle East and to speak to the Norwegian military. Barry would be a ‘nobody’ once again and be demonised and cast adrift from the very life he has become accustomed to.
Barry, it turns out, is exceptionally stupid after all, however. While he fantasises about the rich being killed by “Climate Change”, he refuses to recognise the obvious: The people promoting his “Climate Change” are comprised of the richest capitalists on the planet! Silly Barry!
They do say socialists are just dumb communists after all!
And that, your Majesty, is why the LSE never saw the 2008 crash coming! They can’t see their own theories in practice!
Don’t be like Barry! Barry’s a useful idiot!
Academia’s full of them: Neil Ferguson, Barry Buzan and Colin Alexander. So far up their own arseholes they swallow their own bullshit.
But while Barry will speak in abstract terms about Securitisation, he will never say “There it is!” I wonder why?
Ahh! That could possibly be why!
Alex Belfield: It’s no use folks, people are dumb!
I’ve been keeping an eye on this twat’s youtube channel during the “Covid time” just to get a feel if he or his audience would work it out. He hasn’t and perhaps, just perhaps, only a very few of his audience have – and I mean a few! Out of 350K subs, I’d reckon a handful actually have a handle on all of this.
So here’s a couple of Belfield videos from the last 24 hours. I’ve started them for you at the relevant points so you don’t have to listen to the dross he intersperses with what’s important.
First we have him posting this, saying “how powerful” it is. It actually isn’t because it’s simply a pleading to our captors but, nevertheless, Alex thinks it is and Alex is “on our side” and “gets it”…..
But then we have this. “Prince William agrees with me that we need fewer babies”. What an inept bastard Alex is. He is supporting the entire end goal of what Covid and Climate Change is all about yet has you believe he’s ‘on the ball’ and anti the agenda. He doesn’t even know what the bloody agenda is!
And while Boris tells us, a few years back, just how scared the political establishment are of raising the subject of fertility and human numbers (because it will give the game away)….
It has been “no go” territory for decades within the UN and global politics because of the backlash they would face from the global population. They had no justification for it. But now, they do and even while the politicians are still very careful about raising it publicly (even though NGOs and multiple websites do as well as speeches in Parliaments over decades), Prince William is now entirely confident of stating it – like his father before him and his father before him – because ‘people like Prince William. He’s a ‘nice boy’ – and, not only are the monarchy “above politics” (remind you of ‘securitisation’ by any chance? Above democratic politics? ;-)) but they have also hit a point now, with Covid followed by COP 26, where they feel the majority believe “Climate Change” is happening (or are, at least going along with it) and, this being so, inserting the prospect of reducing childbirth in the plebian population will also be accepted to ‘Save the Planet’.
As for Alex (and so many more like him): They can’t grasp it or they dare not even consider it for fear of crossing the rubicon into territory that would instil even greater fear in them than a fake pandemic.
And watch Philip, the “Virus Prince” that Belfield loved.
Then you have Charles: Prince Of Darkness – https://odysee.com/@Earthling:5/princeofdarkness:1?r=Ca93BhvPPjvSC6LxPus5591n3dKrfYAf
But no, Alex, it hasn’t been the plan for decades, has it? You STUPID, INEPT little man!
Why do you think they let the elderly die last year (and continue to) Alex? And perhaps even purposefully killed them with midazolam.
“I don’t know, Earthling”
Because, from their perspective, the elderly are nothing but a burden and the UK, like the west in general, has a demographic deficit since the elderly proportion of the population is growing and the number of babies being born is contracting.
“Ok, but we need less babies because of climate change!”
So, if we have less babies, Alex and we also kill our elderly, where does that leave us?
“With a far lesser population”
Yes, but where does it end and who is it that needs to contract the population? The Johnsons? Father and son, 12 kids in total (and counting). You don’t have kids, Alex, do you? You’re too busy shagging prostitutes. I can see why you’re not too bothered about them wanting to stop people from having them. But back to the elderly and babies in the UK: Without ‘killing grandma’,
what other ways, do you think, we could convert our demographic deficit into a demographic dividend?
“By having more babies, I guess?”
Yes! But they want a reduction in overall global population. What do you think legalised abortion has been all about? And now, introducing the idea of euthanasia, in addition. Good timing eh? But there’s another way of achieving a demographic dividend, Alex. Haven’t you figured it out? You talk about it enough!
“What’s that?”
‘Dinghy Divers’ Alex! Migration, of working age people, from countries which already have a demographic dividend and you apply the narrative that the migration is caused by “climate change”. So, while you consistently drivel on about the migrants, you don’t have enough brain matter to work out the reasoning behind it! You bleat and moan about it but that’s what most of the bloody population does every day about everything rather than apply themselves to figure out the “why?”. You preach to your audience but give them diddly bloody squat in terms of any insight! But you know your audience and know that the vast majority are clueless but at least they hear someone bleating about the same things who is as clueless as them!
You’re a mug, Alex! And, indeed, the mug you have to sell suits you to a tee: You’re most certainly a Clear Undisputed National Treasure!
Mainstream Senior Lecturer in Political Communications: “The coming genocide?”
I don’t wish to scare anyone but….
I have been invited to attend this lecture and I will. However, I attended one of his previous lectures regarding Covid 19 and I find that he, like many other ‘academics’ tend toward being “the big guy in the room’ and it’s only their narrative which counts. However, for a man who speaks about the propaganda used by the UK government and follows that up with a lecture on a “coming genocide” of antivaxxers, I don’t think, from a government perspective, we need “Conspiracy theorists” any longer because, if mainstream British academics can be lecturing to their students about this sort of thing and the UK government allows them to do so, we’re in deep merde!
Dr Colin Alexander: “Propaganda is ok to discuss but not securitisation” https://www.bitchute.com/video/qVsV6Hj9bPrn/
Think about it: How can the UK government and media disparage and vilify members of the public questioning the entire official narrative while allow a University lecturer to broadcast that the government are both, propagandising the public and their being, potentially (“definitely” in my view) willing to ghettoise, while moving on a trajectory toward ‘genocidal activity’?
I smell a rat and why? Because anyone in the science or medicine fields or in the climate change “denier” field, is shut down – fast and hard. This guy, meanwhile, they have no issues with, while he postulates genocide on the part of the government.
This is not a drill!
Psychopath, Michael Gunner: https://www.bitchute.com/video/VEcnxeYbHrUU/
But let me tell you this: The wider public will never, under any circumstances, care to take onboard the reality of what is going on until they literally see bus loads or train loads of people who ‘disappear’ or who are shot in the street. Even then, it will take thousands or more before the penny drops.
What they will never accept either is that, once the unvaccinated are taken care of, next is the vaccinated because “Covid” was never anything to do with a virus.
Yes, there will be a ‘pause’ in all of this at some point. It will make the vaccinated believe they are ‘safe’ while they go about their daily business, unlike the rest of us. However, just as Austria decided on an unvaccinated lockdown and are now set to change that to a total lockdown (so much for freedom on being vaxxed Austrians!), the real agenda will come to the vaccinated, also.
If the vaxxed do not stand with the unvaxxed and stop this, I don’t care if you’re a doctor, a nurse, an MP, a policeman, or whatever else; You will be affected by this. Somewhere down the road, this will deal with you in one form or another.
“At first they came for…..” Oh the bloody irony of that quote!
Too Many “Hitlers”
In 2015, the New York Times magazine posted the following tweet:
This question has been raised countless times and used in movie and tv plots such as this “Twilight Zone” episode:
I think we can honestly say we are living in the Twilight Zone as we speak, correct? After all, the vast majority of humans didn’t see the present day coming.
So, it’s an interesting question. However, whatever may be your answer is not for debate here. What is up for debate is the following question:
Would you kill those who are currently creating a dystopia which Hitler would never even have dreamed of? You can theorise about Hitler as much as you like (I know my position) but the people presently creating today’s situation are simply the descendants of those in the 1930s who projected their own beliefs, desires and plans upon Hitler and his party.
Today, we have multiple “Hitlers” in multiple countries; Ironically, specifically the countries which created what was called the “Allied Powers” which the world is brainwashed, since WW2, to believe were “the good guys”. Oh what a lovely deception!
Adolf spoke of “The Big Lie” in Mein Kampf. It is consistently referred to as if Adolf promoted the idea when, in fact, he was speaking emphatically about the propensity of his opponents to utilise “the big lie” because it is such a monstrous lie that the normal, everyday man could not imagine those who tell it could possibly create such an evil deception. He realised most people are good people and would not be able to fathom such deceit on such a scale.
So, I present you this. A ‘mosaic’ of many of the existing “hitlers” of today. A Time Machine would not be needed but the question, nevertheless, is asked. After all, those who say they would go back in time to kill Hitler need to ask themselves: “Do I see the early 1930s on a much grander scale today?” and, if so, “Why would I not ‘kill Hitler’?”
There will be some of you who’ll say “Oh not him (or her), they’re nice!”.
My answer: You’re ignorant!
Every last one of them (and so many many more I’ve missed out – as I say “thousands more”) all willing to lock you up, shut you down, control you and kill you.
And here’s the thing: Many people answered the question about killing Hitler when he was a baby in the negative. These people are not babies! They have no excuse unless, like homosexuality, transexuality and paedophilia, psychopathy is given a new designation as just a part of “diversity” and “normality”. Then again, we know we are surrounded by psychopaths and in which arenas they tend to flock:
Now, I don’t think it takes me or any academic study to tell you you’re run by psychopaths. I think that is clearly seen by all today as you watch and listen to them drooling with their power over you on your TV.
So, here’s the thing: If you enjoy this dystopia (or agree with it) well carry on regardless (and you will be added to the list) but, if you want your freedom back, do you really think petitioning or protesting to a group of psychopaths is going to achieve it? Or do you think they may, perhaps, need to be dealt with in another way altogether?
I do!
Hey Greta! Your nightmare will never happen!
I’ve just written, at length, about how the “THREAT” of “Climate Change” has always “been coming” and “on the horizon” but never actually arrived. It’s a bit like when you’re having sex and you really want to get to the climax but your mind keeps wandering off and you can’t stick to the “narrative”. Or, she told you she’d take you to heaven but keeps stopping just as you’re getting there! Ever experienced that?
Well Prince Charles could never be accused of premature ejaculation! He CONTINUOUSLY puts the Climax of Climate Change off into the future as if he has some control over it! HOW ODD!
The Prince knows when the poles are going to disintegrate and the seas are going to rise and the polar bears drown. He even knows the date of the next pandemic (I’m sure of that one!).
He doesn’t extend “doomsday by 10 years though, or even 20 or 30, but by 33! That’s quite an exact number now isn’t it?
Now Charlie, here, continuously harps on about “for our children’s and grandchildren’s future” but nobody ever inquires who “our’s” are? THAT is the deception because it isn’t yours. You have meant to have fewer children if any at all!
When these people refer to “our” you must, must remember it means their, not your! Even “our democracy” or “our planet” or “our security”.
So Greta, is there any chance old Charlie had a fling with your mother? After all, if you’re not his, you don’t count, honey. Sorry!
Then again, you could be lucky if his brother, Andy, wants to “inject” you! I’ve heard he likes to ‘jab’ girls of your age!
But then my post heading would be in error: Your nightmare might still happen! At least a nightmare!
“Climate Change”: The “threat” which ‘Mother Earth’ keeps on delaying. Reminds me of ‘our’ “return” to the moon!
Listen to the professionals
Meanwhile, I’ve heard of trans state but not trans federal. And what a state it is! “Trans federal” would have to mean “global” wouldn’t it? Or am I just getting the whole thing confused?
A man who thinks he’s a woman: Assistant Secretary of Health. Obese too, by the way. They literally are taking the piss folks!
Now, if health personnel would only listen to the Lancet. It is, after all, the world’s premier medical journal (and is on the side of climate change, ironically).
“Addressing COVID-19 means addressing hypertension, obesity, diabetes, cardiovascular and chronic respiratory diseases, and cancer.”
“…no matter how effective a treatment or protective a vaccine, the pursuit of a purely biomedical solution to COVID-19 will fail.”
“COVID-19 is not a pandemic“
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)32000-6/fulltext
Read it carefully.
When people ask me why I’m “exempt”, I just tell them. “I have a medical condition related to my brain”. If they probe further and ask what it is, I simply say “It works”.
You see, a condition is a condition. Something may be in good condition and something perhaps, in bad condition. Both are “medical conditions”.
But as for the obese nurse: What do you think her carbon footprint is? There must have been a good few burgers eaten and that 4% of total UK carbon emissions, by the NHS, must have a good percentage related to her alone!
Then you have to think of her contribution to the carbon emissions of air travel should she be sitting next to you. That plane needs to use up extra fuel to carry excess baggage so it is only right that we have a tiered carbon credits criteria, right? Or, even better: Vaccinated or not, the obese just don’t get to travel!
But here’s the thing: Unlike the vaccinated obese who would take great pleasure in stopping the unvaccinated from travelling, I’m far too kind. I’m just taking the piss and would never support such a measure. That’s the difference between them and I. I don’t despise them for their obesity or their trans federality; I despise them for their being total bastards.
Earthling 
leave a comment