Saturday 30 April 2011
Anyway, kidding aside, what I heard was the rev giving some long winded address on morals and how the 'West' is lacking the guidance of God, believe it or not, and that apparently this ceremony was some kind of exception to the rule. Them that calleth evil good etc. My anglomasonic neighbours had flags out for the ceremony, lol. If only they knew. (I'm sure they don't. Blue lodger types.)
One thing that made me chuckle was that, hey maybe it's just me reading into things, but I get the sense Channel 4 were NOT on board with this royal brainwashing fest. Now C4 are notorious Cultural Marxists usually, whenever they express political views - see their lying documentary about the Bradford riots that makes the Muslims look like innocent angels for instance. (Stop asiatic on asiatic violence...lol. Sorry, tangent, I know.)
However, even a blind 'red' squirrel eventually finds a nut. The night before the royal wedding on Film4 there was The Wind That Shakes The Barley, which I watched as I have not seen it before. And on 4 there was My Big Fat Royal Gypsy Wedding*, which I did not watch as it was obvious trash TV, but I wondered whether the title was a subtle poke in the reptillian eye of the Saxecoburggothasteins. Not sure but the combination of the two on the eve of major occult ceremony did make me think that someone at C4 is very knowledgeable and does not like the royals or their evil empire. Maybe I'm wrong. To be honest when I visualise who runs C4 I picture them in Che t shirts, so maybe they're not bright enough to do that. But what do I know.
So I'm undecided whether the show aims more to mock travellers (govt hates them because they don't pay them for the privilege of existing) or in this case mock the royals.
For a long time people have pointed to 'Wills' as being the antichrist btw, or Charles/Chucky. The latter did say once that he was here to save the earth.
Wednesday 20 April 2011
This is all standard Great Game stuff. It's no good if the 'American Empire' (which is not American except in blood spilt) is simply replaced by the Chicom Empire. Would quite suit the crown either way. Sorry 3W revolutionaries but either way you're screwed, atm.
Monday 18 April 2011
Yet the year since the Deepwater Horizon rig exploded, killing 11 workers and injuring scores more, and causing an environmentally catastrophic oil spill, is proving to be more of an annus mirabilis.Mr Hayward, who described himself as BP's "sacrificial lamb", could have sat back and enjoyed the benefits of the £1m payout and £10m pension pot awarded him on departing BP, together with the $150,000 (£91,000) he is paid to sit on the board of TNK-BP, its joint venture with Russia's third largest oil company. Instead, he is discussing a new financial enterprise with the multimillionaire Nat Rothschild that could see him rake in millions."
Sunday 17 April 2011
Just a few points about abortion.
Firstly, a regular thing that (stereotypically left wing) abortion advocates say is that 'pro life' people only care about the life of unborn children. Since, typically, they tend to also be right wing (neocon), pro-war or militaristic. Which does indeed mean that they only oppose murder of the unborn but not the mass murder which is deceptively labeled 'defence', most of whose victims have already popped out of the womb. It always disappoints me that nobody inverts the argument on them immediately, because they (abortion loving 'liberals') only care about murder of people after they have left the womb, and not before. (And even then they will love a war if it is a 'humanitarian' one in their mind, eg Libya.) Me, I figure all murder is wrong. Revolutionary, I know. lol.That said, I really don't support criminalisation of abortion. Now you may think that is a huge stretch or even doublethink on my part, but if I may?...while I see no pragmatic way to criminalise abortion without having a massive state apparatus...I am wary of the wrath of hundreds of millions of kids who were cut down before having a fair chance. Regardless if that happened before or after they headbutted a mattress, by the way. I doubt they're actually angry since if there is any justice they will be at peace. But could you look them in the eye?
whatever deeds that may be (article gets to what I'm talking about, roughly a third of the way down).
Which leads me to my next statement. I have looked at this from as many angles as I can, and I don't think there's any justification for aborting an unborn child, that could not also be used to justify euthanasia or murder of placenta-free children or the elderly. Well, it feeds from a tube, so do a lot of people in hospitals. It can't feel pain, so can't someone under anaesthetic. It is dependent, so are a large percentage of children, elderly, late stage pregnant, disabled, sick, etc etc. It is dependent on one person only, well so are newborns, to be honest. Or I bet there are a small number of clinically insane people who develop similar attachments to one person only. You get what I'm saying.It irritates me a little that the pro life people have a crutch that they use, which is to say that 'abortion is black genocide' - this is their appeal to PC 'liberals', and don't get me wrong it is a good one, as it pushes their big liberal racial PC button. By all means play their game when you can if it helps. Certainly it is true that in America (where this argument is made, mostly) blacks per capita have three times the abortions that whites do. But still, since blacks are 11-13% of the USA population, the overall majority of abortions in America are most certainly of white babies.
What does it say about us, that it is only a bad thing in the public's mind if a disproportionate number of black babies are killed? Where is the sympathy for the white babies, especially from the mostly whites on both sides of the Western abortion debate? It's genocide alright, but white genocide as well as black. Their attitude seems to be like, "oh sure, kill white babies all day, but don't kill black babies as that's genocide!" Would it be OK if a proportionate number of blacks' and whites' babies were killed? Would a 'quota' of diversity compliant killing be OK?
I agree though, that a lot of white (often, AAA, like the ultimate SWPL liberal David de Rotschild. SWPL, I love that site, very sophisticated satire, I should do a review on it sometime) 'liberals' who profess their undying love for all things African secretly like the black abortions as in their sick mind this 'helps' them sort of like how the pimpin' UN turning up in a 3W country 'helps' them with the AIDS kill-shots.Oh, and there's the (crazy, I know) idea of universal morality and that there really are standards of good and evil above and beyond the 'human condition' and that all murder is a crime against Grasping forcep, such as Bierer or Hern, through the vaginal and cervical canals into the corpus of the uterus. Based upon his knowledge of fetal orientation, he moves the tip of the instrument carefully towards the fetal lower extremities. When the instrument appears on the sonogram screen, the surgeon is able to open and close its jaws to firmly and reliably grasp a lower extremity. The surgeon then ... pulls the extremity into the vagina.
... With a lower extremity in the vagina, the surgeon uses his fingers to deliver the opposite lower extremity, then the torso, the shoulders and the upper extremities.The skull lodges at the internal cervical os. Usually there is not enough dilation for it to pass through. The fetus is oriented dorsum, or spine up.
At this point, the right-handed surgeon slides the fingers of the left hand along the back of the fetus and "hooks" the shoulders of the fetus wit the index and ring fingers (palm down). Next he slides the tip of the middle finger along the spine towards the skull while applying traction to the shoulders and lower extremities. The middle finger lifts and pushes the anterior cervical lip out of the way.While maintaining this tension, lifting the cervix and applying traction to the shoulders with the fingers of the left hand, the surgeon takes a pair of blunt curved Metzenbaum scissors in the right hand. He carefully advances the tip, curved down along the spine and under his middle finger until he feels it contact the base of the skull under the tip of his middle finger.
Reassessing proper placement of the closed scissors tip and safe elevation of the cervix, the surgeon then forces the scissors into the base of the skull or into the foramen magnum. Having safely entered the skull, he spreads the scissors to enlarge the opening.The surgeon removes the scissors and introduces a suction catheter into this hole and evacuates the skull contents. With the catheter still in place, he applies traction to the fetus, removing it completely from the patient. (source)
Saturday 16 April 2011
Libya fake Twitter ID explosion part of 'cyber war for democracy'?
Europeans warned to avoid drinking milk or eating vegetables due to high radiation levels
HAARP-created spring storms kill 11 in southern USA
Royal wedding to cost UK serfs $48 million (about £30 million. That must be an expensive chuppah, eh dear readers?)Bilderberg to meet in Switzerland
I also noticed, maybe it's just a coincidence, RT always has the same female English correspondent on the scene first. Or at least they did that at the Moscow airport bombing (which if you recall, the security turned out to be ICTS the same Israeli firm running 9/11 'security' - strange coincidence also) and now here. Maybe I'm just reading into things too much; but I doubt that, as RT aka Putin TV know whose apple cart they can't upset if they want to remain on the air. I guess it's their way of letting us know (or are they in on the ritual? idk). The amount of truth coming through that channel is stunning, and is freely available here in the UK. It's propaganda but mostly of a good kind. The only downsides are it may promote anti-Americanism or paint the ideologically diverse freedom movement as being anti-American, and it may lead to 'truthers' being seen as Russian propagandists, lmao. RT's method of destroying the Anglo-Zionists is simply to let them speak their hatred and lies and deceit and distortion and blame shifting.
Saturday 9 April 2011
"The ideology extends to the front line. When visiting a Muslim household, we are instructed to remove our shoes, but I have refused to obey that edict because I believe it is disrespectful to my position as British police officer.On one occasion, I had to call on a Muslim family and the daughter refused to let me in until I had taken off my boots.
I simply told her that, while on duty, I was not prepared to remove any part of my equipment, footwear included. So she went off to her father to report my non-compliance, only to find he did not object at all to me keeping my boots on.When I reported this back to the Diversity Unit, the officer implied that I must have intimidated the father, which was nonsense."
Coming to a door near you?Maybe you like to keep your curtains shut, or pay in cash. Perhaps you have bad or hateful or violent thoughts, which may threaten communitarian cohesion? It's OK if you do, you can admit it, and we'll educate away your hatred. We really are here to help y'know.
Thursday 7 April 2011
destabilisation going on with the mostly phakey "heads I win tails you lose" uprisings driving up oil prices among other things.
- ▼ 2011 (246)
- ► 2010 (647)
- ► 2009 (555)
Undebunkable Chemtrails Video That The "Debunkers" Ignore...
...and yes, Chemtrails interfere with weather
(but why they are used, no-one fully knows...)
And You Tell Me There's No Suppressed Technology?
It's another of those 'conspiracy theories' that good citizens don't notice. Imagine the standard of living if all the secret technology was released to the public...we'd be "free and independent" as JFK said! No more poverty anywhere! Can you imagine being sick enough to withhold such technology from society just to maintain your position of control? (Bearing in mind that we don't know just how much technological capability is being withheld, because, duh, it's secret.) What did Nikola Tesla really develop?
Individual Liberty? But that's "selfish"!
No, we need to look after each other voluntarily without having a government do all that at gunpoint. Sounds absurd at first but soon you realise that the reason it sounds so is because of the very unfree nature of our current existence. Envision greater possibilities! Ok, some kind of massive wake-up would be needed before this kind of free, responsible, uncontrollable society could emerge. And that's what we are seeing day by day in the world - a massive waking up of the previously enslaved masses (including myself I must add!)