Earthlinggb's Blog

Rothschild… China, White Phosphorous, Iran and Iraq

Posted in Politics, The Corrupt SOB's, Uncategorized by earthling on February 26, 2011

MP Lazarowicz has been advised time and time again about the Rothschild influence yet has simply refused to accept what is in front of his eyes written in black and white by the UK Parliament.

From: Earthling
To: mark.lazarowicz.mp@parliament.uk
Subject: Coming soon… to the UK.
Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2011 20:22:00 +0000

Dear Mark,

Don’t say I didn’t warn you Mark. Your government of today know it. They’re getting ready for it.
But while all of your colleagues keep your mouths shut to keep in line with the party, this is what you are allowing to build up.
Because you’re allowing yourselves to be bullied. You’re all weak. Just a fact Mark. You’ve lost your individuality. You’re no longer “Mark Lazarowicz” you’re “Mark Lazarowicz Labour MP”. And you and your MP colleagues feel so proud and better and above everyone else – that’s why you feel no need to reply to points which are facts and you cannot argue.
I could be wrong but I sense you picking up on all of this while it’s just too hard and too dangerous for you in your position to speak out. But don’t worry. Your weakness will be more than made up for by those who will. The unfortunate thing is – when they look to you they will ask what your modus operandi was. The answer: “To keep my job”. FAR more important than doing your job isn’t it?
You’re not going to like Britain soon Mark. I don’t like it now but then I “see” it whereas you don’t. You wish to believe it’s all going to blow over.
You’re so very very wrong. Having said that, I hope I’m wrong but I’ve seen this coming for years now. I’ve educated myself immensely to see the how’s and the why’s.

Wisconsin Capitol Building: The Police join the protestors.
breaking-wisconsin-police-have-joined-protest-inside-state-capitol

We have Police in the UK Mark who are beginning to listen too. We don’t want a mini civil war now do we? Or would the bankers profit from it? 😉

I’m just trying to get through to you Mark. When the questions are put nicely I get nothing in return or I get the BULLSHIT responses you know I just got from an evasive treasury. When someone is faced by people who show them no respect, then those people tend to be offered no respect. It’s not a preference but straight, blunt talking is needed and it’s going to be needed even more unless you people get your fingers out of your collective posteriors.

As for the attachments. Just to give you a flavour (hardly exhaustive) of the Rot of the Rothschilds which has crept in over the last couple of centuries – and never let up – while they have “advised” (and I use that term advisedly) the government on all the major sell offs of our industry. A to Z. I haven’t even touched on the Motor industry. So while all the developing world is doing great – investment, GDP growth etc BECAUSE they have basic industry – the UK has zero. Oh EXCEPT for perhaps TWO things – TWO guesses what they are Mark? ….. BANKING and???……….. ARMAMENTS/DEFENCE/WHITE PHOSPHOROUS/ DEPLETED URANIUM SHELLS to sell to Iran and Iraq and every other dictatorship Rothschild can do business with.

Is it getting clearer Mr Lazarowicz?

I wait in hope Mark to hear from a man not a mouse.

Regards,
Earthling

PS: As for the mousy quiet Darling (another weak willed Scot just doing as he’s told – but the pay is good) who has refused to answer the questions I put to him also. Isn’t this a rather interesting little statement he made a number of years ago in the commons:

Mr. Alistair Darling (Edinburgh, Central) I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Edinburgh, Leith (Mr. Chisholm). The reason why we ask him to be brief is that we know that he can make his arguments extremely well briefly, which he does time and again——and I say that not only because he happens to be one of my next-door neighbours in an Edinburgh constituency.
The debate has been extremely useful. On few occasions that I have witnessed in the eight years I have been a Member has the House spent so much time discussing directly problems which affect so many of our constituents, and also a problem that is fundamental to the future development of the economy.
There is no difference between the two sides of the House on the principle of venture capital trusts. We all agree that it is desirable, and from time to time necessary, to use fiscal incentives to ensure that investments are made in the sectors where we need it.
The difference between us is threefold. First, we believe that the Government need to consider other sectors, which have been mentioned on both sides of the House. Secondly, we believe that there must be safeguards to ensure that, if one gives a tax incentive, one does not end up subsidising undesirable behaviour, such as the behaviour that occurred when the business expansion scheme was set up. In that respect, too, there was common ground on both sides of the House. The difference between the two sides is that those who support the Government do not appear to accept that there is a case for ensuring that there should be safeguards in relation to venture capital trusts.
I suppose that the third difference between us is that we believe that the Government have given fiscal incentives in undesirable ways, such as the business
417
expansion scheme, but the Government will not accept that the taxpayer’s money has thereby been poured down the drain. I shall perhaps discuss that later.
7.15 pm
The Minister appeared reluctant to accept that there is no difference of principle between us, so we should perhaps not spend too much time trying to make differences where none exist. Perhaps British industry as a whole will welcome the fact that there is cross-party support for the principle of encouraging investment in what is known as the investment gap, which has been identified by almost every hon. Member who has contributed to the debate.
However, I took exception when the Minister said that because no one was focusing on granny farms, as he put it, that was all right. In support of his proposition, he cited the fact that Rothschild’s supported the Government. What a surprise—Rothschild’s supports the Government. I am sure that a bank such as Rothschild’s, which has no fewer than 14 times been the recipient of public largesse, either as an adviser to the Government or as an underwriter of its flotation schemes, should say, “Well done the Government for coming up with that scheme.”
Indeed, as my hon. Friends the Member for Sheffield, Attercliffe (Mr. Betts) and for Rotherham (Mr. MacShane) said, if venture capitalists do take great care in assessing the risks and evaluating the projects before them, it is scarcely surprising that the Chancellor hardly sat down after his Budget statement before our old chums at Rothschild’s announced that they were going to set up a venture capital trust. They could not have known what was in the Budget, could they? How on earth would they know what a surefire bet it was—unless, of course, they had the amazing foresight of the noble Lord Archer of Weston-super-Mare?How could Rothschild’s say so confidently that it was going to set up a venture capital trust unless it had made an evaluation of the type of tax breaks available and knew that, no matter what the risk, no matter what venture it backed, it was guaranteed to obtain a suitable return?
I do not think that the Minister can rely on Rothschild’s for support, therefore, and I believe that both he and Conservative Members generally, today of all days, would do well to be very quiet about Rothschild’s and the Conservative party, for reasons that people outside and inside the House will understand.
The main subject to which successive hon. Members drew attention was the funding gap between quoted companies and small businesses, many of which are funded by family money or by bank overdraft. As my hon. Friend the Member for Dudley, West (Mr. Pearson) said, that is starting to change; nevertheless, there is obviously a funding gap and we welcome the fact that the Government are tackling it.
I want to take up an argument that the hon. Member for Gordon (Mr. Bruce) made about property. I think that we all accept that if inflation remains low—a big “if’—obviously property will not be the kind of bet that it was in the past 30 or 40 years. However, in my travels around the City of London I have been surprised how many people tell me that they are getting back into property again. We all remember the property collapses of the 1970s, the late 1980s and the early 1990s; yet people are getting back into property because it is regarded as a major asset in a portfolio.

But no, indeed, Alistair has no idea what I’m talking about when I put those questions to him now does he?
Would you care to comment Mark? No, I guess not.

Attachments:










I hope that gives a fairly decent summary to you all regarding Rothschild TOTAL influence on the UK government (along with their “Friends of Israel lobby) which you can consider having watched the following Channel 4 programme “Dispatches” Nov 16 2009:
article23997.htm

While you may then consider the following Rothschild “ADVICE” to the UK government:
article6814923.ece

While you may also consider the following Rothschild/Mandelson/Osbourne threesome:
YOU DO NOT MESS WITH THESE JEWS GIDEON! THEY DESTROY GOVERNMENTS NEVERMIND LITTLE WEEDS LIKE YOU!

George-Osborne-warned-stop-rubbishing-Rothschild-or-youre-finished.html

While you ALSO may consider this. Mandelson and Blair dine with the Rothschilds and Gaddafi:
Lord-Peter-Mandelson-spends-weekend-with-Colonel-Gaddafis-son-Saif.html

And this…. Mandelson is, in fact, very likely a Rothschild…..

Mandelsons-family-history–claim-uncrowned-King-Poland.html

While Hannah Rothschild calls him “The REAL PM”! 😉

From the Independent 24th October 2010:

And finally, you may wish to understand why our dearly departed ex PM Blair gets along so well and becomes so rich while being picked up by J.P. Morgan (another Rothschild front bank):

Blair-invites-billionaires-exclusive-No-10-party.html

Who arranged the entire thing for him? Lady Lynn Forester De Rothschild, old Evelyn’s bit of fluff!

IS THE FOG LIFTING? IS IT NOW AS CLEAR AS A PLATE GLASS WINDOW FOR YOU?

Islamic Fundamentalism (Wahhabism) created by Zionists!

Posted in "Terrorism", Geo-Political Warfare, The illegal wars by earthling on January 15, 2010

291a

 

 

You ALL believe that Islam is the enemy. You believe Muslim Fundamentalism is at the root of all evil.

But you are wrong. The con is massive and the con stretches across the entire Islamic world also. As much as YOU (We) don’t understand the conflict NEITHER DO THE TRUE MUSLIMS!

Why?

This is why:

  • Give some thought to the fact “Osama Bin Laden” came from a sect of the Wahhabi tribe.
  • Consider the fact that the majority of the hijackers on 9/11 weren’t Iranian or Iraqi or even Afghani but were SAUDI NATIONALS!
  • Consider the fact that the Saudi Royals and their country – while the rest of the Arab/Muslim world are demonized by the USA and it only takes ONE guy (Nigerian but boarded a plane in Yemen) to have the USA focus on “Al Qaeda in Yemen” – is NEVER a target of the USA while the MAJORITY (yes I repeat it) of the 9/11 alleged hijackers were Saudi nationals!!
  • Consider that, for now, it is the Saudis who are in control of the Oil in the gulf to the greatest degree AND they set the price to the world (along with their Zionist/American “friends”) while Iran (and Iraq) have significant oil reserves and are happy to consider LOWER prices!!
  • Do you never wonder why Saudi does not protest about Israeli nuclear missiles, while they object to Iranian power plants?
  • Did you forget that AL SAUD were SADDAM’s biggest supporters to attack Iran in 1980?
  • Isn’t it strange that Saudi is very quiet when Israel attacks Lebanon / Gaza or American/Nato troops kill civilians in IRAQ and Afghanistan?

I COULD GO ON AND ON but I won’t.

Let me just let you chew over this for a moment:

King FAISAL AL-SAUD declared to the WASHINGTON POST on Sept. 17, 1969:

“WE, THE SAUDI FAMILY, are cousins of the Jews: we entirely disagree with any Arab or Muslim Authority which shows any antagonism to the Jews; but we must live together with them in peace. Our country (Arabia) is the Fountain head from where the first Jew sprang, and his descendants spread out all over the world.”

In the 1960’s the “Sawt Al Arab” Broadcasting Station in Cairo, Egypt, and the Yemen Broadcasting Station in Sana’a confirmed the Jewish Ancestry of the Saudi Family ” – James Matthew Cantu


The Saudi Royal Family are Zionist with their origins going back to MORDAKHAI BIN IBRAHIM BIN MOSHE’.

And Wahhabism is the House of Saud SECT – a total corruption of the Islamic faith which was promoted by Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab, founder of “Wahhabism” an ‘austere’ form of Islam. al-Wahhab arrives in the central Arabian state of Najd in 1744 preaching a return to “pure” Islam. He seeks protection from the local emir, Muhammad ibn Saud, head of the Al Saud tribal family, and they cut a deal. The Al Saud will endorse al-Wahhab’s austere form of Islam and in return, the Al Saud will get political legitimacy and regular tithes from al-Wahhab’s followers. The religious-political alliance that al-Wahhab and Saud forge endures to this day in Saudi Arabia.

The research of Mohammad Sakher led to an order for his death by the Saudi Regime for the following findings: The Saudi family, who, despite claims otherwise, were descended from Jewish merchants from Iraq. Sakhir found that the Jewish Ancestor of the Saudi family was called Mordakhai Bin Ibrihim Bin Moshe but changed his name to Markhan Bin Ibrahim Musa.

There are records in the British war Museum that the British paid 15,000 pound sterling per month to the thug Ibne Saud to oppose Muslim Ottomans and with explicit instructions to share the money with Muhammad bin Abdul Wahab because he introduced Ibne Saud to the British. The British ordered Ibne Saud to have a relationship with Muhammad bin Abdul Wahab and now the present day Saudi family are descendants of both Muhammad bin Abdul Wahab and Ibne Saud. Also, the british sent a spy named “Hempher” to convince Muhammed bin abdul wahab to create the “wahhabi” sect…this was to create groups between muslims and divide them…..due to this, today all saudis are wahabis.

The House of Saud, therefore, works WITH the US, British and Israeli elites AGAINST the REAL Muslims of Iraq/Iran etc. The House of Saud (with their 9/11 hijackers – who, in fact, I do not believe WERE on those planes) works WITH their Zionist chums to create the vision that the true Islam is terrorist when, in fact, the House of Saud are Zionist working with the west and hate the true Islam.

Why? Because the House of Saud – if they did not play this game with the UK, USA and Israel – would be targeted for regime change as much as Iraq/Iran and Afghanistan etc. What you need to remember is that, not only are they Zionist by this ‘austere’ form of religion CREATED by a zionist BUT they also have a LOT to lose if they don’t play with the west.
The people of the Muslim world are as confused as we are about all of this. The Saudi people do not recognise this con. They know as much (generally speaking) about the history of their country and the history of their religion and politics as we do. Perhaps less because they are so controlled and conditioned.

It’s a pure mindf*ck people. It is again, the elites brainwashing the masses for divide and conquer and this little part of the story goes back to the Ottoman Empire and why that was destroyed by “us” (“us” being the Bankers again!).

Now, you may say “But the Saudis and Israelis are mortal enemies and have fought wars!!”

Yes they have fought wars. Who has died due to them? The House of Saud? No. We Brits have fought wars against Iraq and Afghanistan. Are the people of these countries mortal enemies of the people of the UK? Yes IF you believe the propaganda of our governments. How many of you are willing to today? How many of you believe Blair should be convicted for lying to us? And who have died in OUR “wars”? Name a government official’s child who has died?
A country they refuse to recognise or even negotiate with: Hmmm look deeper and just read the words of the King again! “Cousins”.

You may point to the Saudis giving safe havens to Hezbollah etc….

Think on this:

Does a government do what it’s people wish? Has ours?
When our government supported the Iraq war and the people didn’t, did they care?
Again, this is nothing to do with Saudi people OR Jewish people. This is to do with governments and regimes.

When our government threw its people into Iraq and Afghanistan, did it affect our government? Have any of our government or their families died in those “wars”? No.

Did any of the House of Saud die in the Saudi/Israeli war? No.

The House of Saud (as with our own government/establishment) manouvre the pieces of a chess set as and how they wish. The House of Saud will quite happily give safe haven to organisations which are against the Israelis while the House of Saud shall support the Israeli regime. But you can’t get that in your head can you?

As for safe haven? Let’s take a look at one Sheikh Omar Bakri Muhammad (Islam4UK Choudary’s chum):

In Beirut, he joined Sheikh Khalil Al-Mat and the local branch of Hizb Al-Tahrir. Then, in 1983, (or according to some versions in 1979 during Syria’s invasion of Lebanon) he took the alias of Omar Fustuk and settled in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, where he established “Al-Muhajirun” as a front for the Hizb Al-Tahrir in the Arabian Peninsula. Al-Muhajirun now has offshoots in Lille, France, and Hanover, Germany. In 1995, 47 Sunni organizations were reported to be active in Western Europe under the umbrella of Hizb Al-Tahrir, which is headquartered in Hamburg.

In 1985, after the Saudi government deported him he then went to London where he later left Hizb Al-Tahrir following a disagreement with its leaders. While Bakri wanted to deal with numerous issues troubling the Muslim community, such as racism and unemployment, the Hizb Al-Tahrir leaders claimed that such activity would sidetrack the party from its main goal, the establishment of an Islamic caliphate.

In 1993, Bakri became a legal resident of Britain, and in March 1996 he applied for citizenship.

So: The Saudis DEPORT the guy and where does he end up going? THE UK!!

So here we have a government (the British Government) accepting a “known terrorist” who has been “thrown out” by the Saudi government and given him SAFE HAVEN in the UK.

So according to this idea of Saudi giving safe haven to terrorists, just as the Saudi government are evil because they give safe haven to what you describe as terrorist organisations and people, can’t we now say the same for OUR government?

Does that make the UK and its people (who have no say) a terrorist nation?

Think through the logic!!

So, basically, what I’m telling you is this: the entire terrorism threat is being orchestrated by the Zionists within Israel/Mossad, the USA/CIA and Britain itself along with help from Saudi Arabia in the form of the house of Saud (Saudi Royal family) who wish to retain their positions as Kings of the Middle East while collaborating with the Western Zionist machine.

There is a long time established and very respected organisation by the name of the CATO Institute based in Washington D.C. I happen to have come across a document of theirs dated 1992 which is a Policy Analysis of the US Government and the title of the document is “The “Green Peril’: Creating the Islamic Fundamentalist threat”.

Again, I repeat, this is 1992.

Here are excerpts which, I hope, when you make a comparison of what I have just discussed you may well then appreciate the reality of it.

You may also clearly recognise that, if you were also to read “The Grand Chessboard” by Zbigniew Brzezinski and the PNAC document “Rebuilding America’s Defences”, you would have no shadow of a doubt about the con which is being played out in manipulating YOUR belief that we have a TRUE Muslim threat. For we never have.

Excerpts: (oh, by the way, it’s written by Leon T Hadar, a former bureau chief for the Jerusalem Post).

Now that the Cold War is becoming a memory, America’s foreign policy establishment has begun searching for new enemies. Possible new villains include “instability” in Europe –ranging from German resurgence to new Russian imperialism– the “vanishing” ozone layer, nuclear proliferation, and narcoterrorism. Topping the list of potential new global bogeymen, however, are the Yellow Peril, the alleged threat to American economic security emanating from East Asia, and the so-called Green Peril (green is the color of Islam). That peril is symbolized by the Middle Eastern Moslem fundamentalist–the “Fundie,” to use a term coined by The Economist–a Khomeini-like creature, armed with a radical ideology, equipped with nuclear weapons, and intent on launching a violent jihad against Western civilization.

“Islamic fundamentalism is an aggressive revolutionary movement as militant and violent as the Bolshevik, Fascist, and Nazi movements of the past,” according to Amos Perlmutter. It is “authoritarian, anti-democratic, anti-secular,” and cannot be reconciled with the “Christian-secular universe” and its goal is the establishment of a “totalitarian Islamic state” in the Middle East, he argued, suggesting that the United States should make sure the movement is “stifled at birth.”
The Islam vs. West paradigm, reflected in such observations, is beginning to infect Washington. That development recalls the efforts by some of Washington’s iron triangles as well as by foreign players during the months leading up to the 1990-91 Persian Gulf crisis. Their use of the media succeeded in building up Saddam Hussein as the “most dangerous man in the world” and as one of America’s first new post-Cold War bogeymen. Those efforts, including allegations that Iraq had plans to dominate the Middle East, helped to condition the American public and elites for the U.S. intervention in the gulf.

There are dangerous signs that the process of creating a monolithic threat out of isolated events and trends in the Moslem world is already beginning. The Green Peril thesis is now being used to explain diverse and unrelated events in that region, with Tehran replacing Moscow as the center of ideological subversion and military expansionism and Islam substituting for the spiritual energy of communism.
Islam does seem to fit the bill as the ideal post-Cold War villain. “It’s big; it’s scary; it’s anti-Western; it feeds on poverty and discontent,” wrote David Ignatius, adding that Islam “spreads across vast swaths of the globe that can be colored green on the television maps in the same way that communist countries used to be colored red.”

NOW THIS NEXT PART IS AN AMAZING PIECE OF HONESTY (and REMEMBER, this was 1992 only MONTHS before the first WTC bombing which the brought the “threat” of “Islamic Militism” to light. Completely and utterly constructed.


The creation of a peril usually starts with mysterious “sources” and unnamed officials who leak information, float trial balloons, and warn about the coming threat. Those sources reflect debates and discussions taking place within government. Their information is then augmented by colorful intelligence reports that finger exotic and conspiratorial terrorists and military advisers. Journalists then search for the named and other villains. The media end up finding corroboration from foreign sources who form an informal coalition with the sources in the U.S. government and help the press uncover further information substantiating the threat coming from the new bad guys.
In addition, think tanks studies and op-ed pieces add momentum to the official spin. Their publication is followed by congressional hearings, policy conferences, and public press briefings. A governmental policy debate ensues, producing studies, working papers, and eventually doctrines and policies that become part of the media’s spin. The new villain is now ready to be integrated into the popular culture to help to mobilize public support for a new crusade. In the case of the Green Peril, that process has been under way for several months.

The Israeli government and its supporters in Washington are also trying to play the Islamic card. The specter of Central Asian republics and Iran equipped with nuclear weapons helps Israel to reduce any potential international pressure on it to place its own nuclear capabilities and strategy on the negotiating table. More important, perhaps, the Green Peril could revive, in the long run, Israel’s role as America’s strategic asset, which was eroded as a result of the end of the Cold War and was seriously questioned during the Gulf War.

NOW on the specific point of the House of Saud:


As has that of Egypt and Israel, Saudi Arabia’s use of the Green Peril to mobilize U.S. support has been characterized by confusion, ironies, and paradoxes, the most dramatic of which has been the kingdom’s own commitment to Islamic fundamentalism. With the elimination of Iraq as a regional military power, the Saudi royal family, worried about the rise of Tehran as a hegemonic player in the gulf, has been fanning the anti-fundamentalist and anti-Iranian mood in Washington. The Saudis have indicated that they are interested in countering Iranian influence in Central Asia. Ironically, they are doing what they accuse Tehran of– spending lavishly to establish political and religious influence. Riyadh has spent more than $1 billion to promote the Saudi brand of Islam. Along with Egypt, Saudi Arabia has also been supporting the Somali president against a faction, supported by Iran, that is trying to overthrow him.

A series of reports about resurgent militant Islamic forces in Saudi Arabia (which also portrayed the royal family as a politically reformist regime and active supporter of the U.S.-led peace process) has been used to try to mobilize American support for the Saudis as a “moderate pillar” and anti-fundamentalist force in the gulf, the Middle East, and Central Asia.
The problem with that campaign is that the legitimacy of the Saudi regime is based on its own Islamic fundamentalist principles. The Saudi government is actually more rigid in its application of Islamic law and more repressive in many respects than the one in Tehran. For example, Saudi Arabia has no form of popular representation, and political rights are totally denied women and non-Moslems. The Saudi regime has been able to stay in power largely because it has had both direct and indirect American military support, most recently during the Gulf War. To paraphrase President Franklin D. Roosevelt, the Saudis are Islamic fundamentalists–but they are our Islamic fundamentalists.

Just read that last line again! “but they are our Islamic fundamentalists”.

Full paper here: http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-177.html

House of Saud: On America’s side. On Britain’s side. On the Israeli side. The WESTERN DEMOCRACY BASED IMF SIDE.
So they will supply the Wahhabi sect of “Muslim Fundamentalism” which is, in fact at the core, Zionist in nature to support the Western democratic aim to undermine the Muslim world. And how better to do that than to demonise the Muslim world by presenting them as the terrorists. THEY ARE NOT.

Just like the Irgun before them, the Mossad and their collaborators within the CIA and MI6 etc etc are doing the terrorism job on behalf of the west and the media, ignorantly mostly, supports that agenda because the people who own the media are also?….. Zionist…. and all for supporting the Western democratic agenda.

You might think “Well that suits me because I’m western and I don’t want Islam” but you are completely missing the point. The only REASON Islam is affecting you is because our own elites are creating it to ensure they get the reaction from you that they need to justify the further control of you. You are supporting your own oppression!

ADDENDUM:

Why do you think we get headlines such as this?

us-embassy-cables-saudis-iran

Sorry but “DUH!” comes to mind!

Now let’s get a further idea about the Saudis (from Wikileaks/Assange) and then we’ll take a look at Assange!

So, again, Saudis, wanted to (and want) to attack Iran – yes I understand full well the issues between shi’ite and Sunni Muslims but pardon me for making this analogy: I also understand the difference between Glasgow Celtic and Glasgow Rangers but when it’s Scotland V England or anyone else, both these “tribes” will work together to eliminate the common opposition. Simple but effective analogy I would say. You might not but I do.

Note also the fact that the Saudi Royals do not obey “their” own laws. What a surprise! Do you for one moment believe OUR political and establishment class obey ours? What do you think “Crown Immunity” is all about? Smell the coffee!

Now back to Assange. His Layer, MARK STEPHENS “believes in him and believes what he is doing is right”. Well he would wouldn’t he? Because Mark, Assange and someone else are VERY closely connected. That someone else having more power in his left pinky than an entire Army! In fact NATO and friends ARE to some degree, his left pinky!

And Stephens also says there are thousands who can release the documents? Ever given that a moment’s thought as to why? and WHO these thousands would consist of?

Assange is simply a new construct of the mainstream media because the powers that be recognise noone trust the mainstream media any longer. We KNOW they are controlled. So bring out into the spotlight a “hero” of the people who “leaks” things BUT ONLY THOSE THINGS YOU WISH TO BE LEAKED.

And when you want the destruction of governments and national sovereignty’s anyhow, what better way than to “sell” the world a leak merchant who’s “on your side”. 🙂

Oh we are SO gullible!

 

 

 

 

I MEAN TELL ME? ISN’T IT OBVIOUS TO YOU WHY ALL OF THESE “MUSLIM FUNDAMENTALISTS” GENERALLY ALL KEEP THEIR FACES WELL COVERED? DO YOU REALLY FALL FOR IT ALL?

HAS THE QUESTION NEVER EVEN OCCURRED TO YOU?