Saturday, 18 July 2015

ROYAL NAZI SALUTES. A TELLING FREEZE-FRAME MOMENT IN HISTORY

.
.


There is a tsunami of bogus analysis in the media today on this Royal Hitler-lovers story. All mainstream sources deliberately missing the point (which is, of course, their job).

Because I have not read any kind of similar reflections relating to the 1933 Royal Nazi salutes reproduced in today's 'Sun', this blog might as well offer the following:

1933 was only 15 or 16 years after the assassination of the Czar's family by the Wall-Street-funded Bolshevists in Russia/The Soviet Union. 

The Czar was a cousin to the British Royals.

If the House of Windsor did not understand what was going on at the time, it is certain that by 1933 they had got the message*. The winners of WW1 were clearly the international financial cartel that had mysteriously managed to start the war (we still cannot be sure how they kicked off this otherwise pointless catastrophe). 

Germany had the Allies on their knees in 1916 then suddenly the USA (up to that point determinedly non-interventionist) had come in on our side while simultaneously Palestine had been promised to the Jewish people. 

The Zionist project was airborne. Funds and, hence, logistical support dried up for the German army and we know most of the rest.

Many of the European old order understood that international finance was now in control and if one wanted to remain alive, even if you were Royalty, the only viable option was to do as they say.

Elements in the British and other European aristocracies did not like this one bit.

When Hitler took over Germany and created its economic miracle these people, including many of the Czar's cousins in England, looked to Hitler to restore the old order.

Their hopes were short-lived.

International finance won WW2** also. The British Royals and the entire European aristocracy knew very well that their only future lay in making themselves submissive partners to these covert masters of the earth.

The truth is something extremely close to the above. 

This picture of the Royal Nazi salutes is a very telling freeze-frame-moment from our history.


*   The Protocols of Zion had been published in the UK 12 years before 1933. Lord Northcliffe, part-owner and writer for The Times and The Observer demanded an investigation into the document. Within months Northcliffe was dead and the POZ declared a 'forgery'. 
Douglas Reed who had worked for Northcliffe, met him in Switzerland shortly before he died and described him as a frightened man who had in Northcliffe's own words "made powerful enemies".


** "Germany's unforgiveable crime before WW2 was its attempt to loosen its economy out the the world trade system and to build uo an independent exchange system from which the world-finance could not profit any more....we butchered the wrong pig."
- Winston Churchill (The Second world War - Berne 1960)

"We made a monster, a devil, out of Hitler. Therefore, we couldn't disavow it after the war. After all, we mobilised the masses against the Devil himself so we were forced to play our part in this diabolic scenario after the war. In no way could we have pointed out to our people that the war was only an economic preventive measure."

-US Foreign Secretary James Baker (1992)


.



.


Sunday, 5 July 2015

7/7 REPOST: FAIR QUESTIONS FOR ANY BRITISH M.P.


.

There is no safety for honest men except by believing all possible
evil of evil men.”
-- Edmund Burke

"Power always thinks it has a great soul and vast views beyond the comprehension of the weak.That is the deep root of the combination of savagery and self-righteousness that infects the imperial mentality — and in some measure, every structure of authority and domination."---- US President John Adams

"The two enemies of the people are criminals and government"-- Thomas Jefferson



On the 10th anniversary of the 7/7 Bombing here is a reminder that the inconvenient facts relating to this day have not been mentioned, never mind discussed, in the mainstream media. 

We must guard against becoming weary of repeating doubts (and certainties) relating to the ongoing false-flag outrages that continue to define our political present and fashion our futures. We are not as helpless as we might sometimes be tempted to think.

I visited my MP, Gavin Barwell (Con., Croydon Central) to raise the following questions. Having discussed various highly dubious and damaging-if-false assertions that are allowed to persist unchallenged in the public domain, I left him the document below with a request that he get back to me with whatever answers to the seven questions he could unearth. 

He said he would look into the issues but has (unsurprisingly) failed to respond. 

Nonetheless, it is surely continues to be a worthwhile exercise to make our representatives aware of the astonishing anomalies associate with the official 7/7 narrative.

Please read the following and continue to circulate these details, which conflict severely with the official narrative of the day. Please copy, print and post (or email) to your local M.P. and demand answers.

The 'London Bombings' and the lies we have been told about 7/7 must never be allowed to disappear from public consciousness. If the state believes it can safely lie to us about such matters, it will believe it can get away with absolutely anything.


SEVEN FAIR QUESTIONS RELATING TO THE 7/7 LONDON BOMBINGS  

Three Holes in the Floor of the Edgware Road Carriage

Evidence was given by different witnesses, including the train driver (Ray Whitehead), that clearly describe three large separate holes in front of two different sets of doors in the Edgware Road carriage. People fell into all three holes. Two emerged from the holes . One died in the third hole. The original report on the Edgware Road explosion (from mark Honigsbaum of the Guardian who was on the train) had the train lifting off the tracks and being derailed (i.e. bomb(s) underneath the train). The driver described all the access panels in the floor of the first coach (the bomb(s) killed people in the second carriage) being 'flipped open' from underneath.

References to evidence: Ray Whitehead (Nov 16 pm, 58:9-15) Daniel Belsden (Nov 11 am, 9:13-22) David Matthews (Nov 17, am, 105:21-106:18) John McDonald  (Nov 9, 42:18 – 44:11). Find all here at http://7julyinquests.independent.gov.uk/

QUESTION ONE
In what way is any of this compatible with a single suicide 'suicide bomber' carrying a rucksack full of black pepper and hydrogen peroxide?





Body Count reveals no Bombers

The First Official Body Count on Two of the Trains was One Body Short

At the 7/7/ Inquest in November 2010 Dr. Morgan Costello gave evidence that he was asked to attend two scenes, Edgware Road and Aldgate, for the 'purposes of certifying the extinction of life'. He counted six bodies at Edgware Road and seven bodies at Aldgate and declared these as 'life extinct'. The enormous anomaly, that passed completely unreported in the press, was that the numbers should have been seven and eight if we count the bodies of the bombers. No similar count seems to have been carried out on the other (Russell Square ) train but we do know a little about the behaviour of the Russell Square bomber, Germaine Lindsay, before his demise.

 QUESTION TWO
Are not these two body counts extraordinarily powerful evidence that there were no suicide bombers on the Aldgate and Edgware Road two trains?
Evidence presented to the Inquest did claim that Tanweer and Khan were blown into a large number different pieces by their bombs……but how would this be consistent with the fact that almost all the other serious injuries in those coaches were lower limb injuries to feet and legs?





The Explosives

Here is a timeline for the 7/7 explosives narrative as it developed:

The first analysis came from a genuine expert. This is surely the most reliable commentary on the nature of the bombs that went off that morning. The problem is that it would have been all-but-impossible for four young men from Leeds to get their hands on such materials.

On 12 July 2005, Superintendent Christophe Chaboud, chief of French anti-terrorism Coordination Unit who was in London assisting Scotland Yard with its investigation, confirmed to The Times that,‘The nature of the explosives appears to be military, which is very worrying….the material used were not homemade but sophisticated military explosives …’ (Nafeez Ahmed The London Bombs, p.24)

On 13th July it was stated that these were of ‘C4’ explosive....London explosives have military origin – [Science Daily. LONDON, July 13 (UPI)]: Forensic scientists told the newspaper the construction of the four devices detonated in London was very technically advanced, and unlike any instructions that can be found on the Internet.’

From The Independent on July 14th: ‘A bath filled with explosives has been found at a house in Leeds that was the “operational base” for the London suicide bombers
17th July 2005 The Observer: ‘22 lbs TATP in the bath.’

The TATP story survived but faded away in 2007 then, when the 7/7 Kingston trial came along in the summer of 2008 all trace of the TATP story had gone.

Now the explosives were made of black pepper and hydrogen peroxide. The idea of the four heating up Hydrogen Peroxide in their kitchen to the point where it would make an explosive mix with black pepper is simply laughable. How could they test that their ‘bombs’ were going to go off. Were they going to go lurching across the country with this kind of bomb sloshing about in their rucksacks. Has anybody ever made a bomb out of this mixture? If such a bomb did explode could it possibly have caused the devastation created on 7/7?

There is much written online that mocks these materials as potential tools of mass destruction. Do we not require a Public Inquiry on this issue alone. The changing storyline above surely makes no sense at all.

QUESTION THREE (Bombs)
How would four inexperienced Muslims have known how to reduce the hydrogen peroxide to the right concentrations safely?
Why was no chemical analysis of the blast burns inside the carriages carried out? 





….more seriously

Why No Post-Mortems?

Another astonishing fact that emerged during the 2010-11 7/7 Inquest was that no post mortems were carried out on the bodies of the victims. A very great deal about the nature of and distance from the explosions could have been discovered from such examinations. The effects of different explosives on flesh are well-known. Such post-mortems would have provided some definitive information that would have at least ruled out some possible explosives from consideration as the source material of the blasts. What could possibly explain such an oversight other than the desire to avoid creating conflicts with a fabricated narrative.

QUESTION FOUR (Bombs)
 Why were there no post-mortems on any of the victims? (definitive information about the explosives could have been gained from such investigations)



Why Suicide?

Moving on to another very obvious (but irresolvable) question: why would terrorists who wished to wreak havoc and punish British people for the UK’s involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan choose to blow themselves up along with their victims? These were very crowded trains. They could have set a timed detonator and quietly slipped off the trains a stop or two early, leaving their bags on the floor amongst the feet of dozens of incurious passengers. Where would have been the risk in that? Surely such activists would better serve their cause by continuing and not terminating their mission?




Another obvious question:
QUESTION FIVE(CCTV)

Why, in the most CCTV-rich environment on earth, is there so little footage of the four available? Why is it that the few pictures that are available mostly contain no other identifiable persons that could confirm the accuracy and veracity of these pictures? Surely it should have been possible to construct a water-tight case against the four from the CCTV alone?




Drills


There were four uncannily accurate drills (or rehearsals) carried out before the 7/7 bombings:
1) The BBC Panorama ‘management exercise’ programme of May 2004 during which a panel of ‘managers’, including Peter Power (see below) and Michael Portillo, discussed how they would deal with a terror attack on London that revealed itself to them through mock news reports as the show progressed. The scenario they had to deal with turned out to be one overground and 3 underground explosions taking place over a short space of time during the morning rush hour.

2) The contemporaneous 7/7 drill: on 7/7 itself Peter Power conducted a terror drill that shadowed the cataclysm as it happened – over the same three tube stations at more or less the same time. On the afternoon of 7/7 he was interviewed on Radio 5’s ‘Drivetime’ programme:
POWER: …at half-past nine this morning we were actually running an exercise for, er, over, a company of over a thousand people in London based on simultaneous bombs going off precisely at the railway stations where it happened this morning, so I still have the hairs on the back of my neck standing upright!

3) Atlantic Blue: held over 5-8 April, 2005. All echelons of government participated in this large terror-drill. The Independent reported after July 7th that “By an extraordinary coincidence, all the experts who formulate such plans are together in a meeting at the headquarters of the London Ambulance Service – and they are discussing an exercise they ran three months ago that involved simulating four terrorist bombs going off at once across London.”

4) Operation Hanover: London’s police hold a little-known yearly terror-drill. On 2005 it just happened to be held on 1-2 July. Its game-plan was threefold: three ‘simultaneous’ bomb attacks on three underground stations. The police have been reticent about discussing this astounding precursor event, mere days before 7/7. They only revealed it in 2009.

QUESTION SIX
What is the probability that practice drills should be going on in exactly the same stations at exactly the same time as surprise terrorist attacks occur?





Germaine Lindsay, cool and then confused


Germaine Lindsay drove from Aylesbury to meet the other (let’s call them) bombers in Luton railway station. He arrived an hour before them and decided to take a little nap. He received a parking ticket while asleep in his car. Were he a terrorist he obviously would have known that he would have had only four hours left to live.

Germaine Lindsay was one extraordinarily relaxed suicide-bomber. 
A station attendant called Mr. Patel gave testimony to the Inquest that a man he identified as Germaine Lindsay arrived on the concourse of King’s Cross station and asked to talk to “The Duty Manager”. He said it was, “Very important.” Mr Patel remarked that it was very unusual for a member of the public to know the exact name for the person in charge of the station. Normally people asked for ‘the supervisor’ or ‘the manager’. At this time there was chaos on the concourse. The metal grills had been pulled down and shut at the front of the station. Passengers were not being allowed through the barriers. A crowd had built up and people were starting to abuse staff. Numbers of ‘Community Support Officers’ who looked like police were milling around the area trying to manage the situation. No wonder Lindsay was confused. He must have decided to try to speak to someone who ‘was in on the game’ to explain to him what was going on. The most obvious explanation of his behaviour is that it would have puzzled and alarmed him that the drill had started before he, ‘the bomber’, had caught their trains. Perhaps a chilling possibility occurred to him. When Mr. Patel returned with the duty manager Lindsay had gone.

And More

There are many, many other serious anomalies and matters requiring investigation in the official narrative.


1. Train Times
The train times presented huge problems for the official narrative causing the Home Secretary to change the story after it was realised that the 7.40 they were said to have caught had been cancelled. Then the next train arrived 23 minutes late at King’s Cross giving the bombers only three minutes to buy four RETURN tickets (think about that one), cross the track by bridge and board the last possible train that makes it just feasible they could have reached the bombed trains in time.

2. Khan
On the 5th July 2005, Mohammed Siddique Khan took his pregnant wife to Dewsbury Hospital in West Yorkshire. She was bleeding and there was obviously something wrong. Doctors examined Hasina Patel and said that there was a ‘threatened miscarriage’. They sent her home and booked her in for a scan on the 7th. Mrs Patel has never told the time they got home but afterwards Mohammed Khan said that he was ‘going to see his friends’. Hasina Patel never saw or heard from her husband ever again. She miscarried on July 6th . At the 7/7 Inquest there was ‘evidence’ (peculiar and surely untrustworthy) presented of a mobile phone text-message exchange between Khan and Germaine Lindsay at 4.35am on the morning of the 6th July. Would Khan really have abandoned his desperate wife for a whole day while she was in that condition? Khan was a highly respected in his community and by the headmistress of the special school in which he worked as a classroom assistant. The police had used him to mediate between rival gangs in local disputes. He was trusted by all sides. Hilary Benn had taken Khan on a tour of the House of Commons. He was not known to be politically radical. Quite the opposite. He was protective of the good name of his community and was eager to maintain good relations with the local white community. Bearing this in mind it is likely that the reason the police have film of Khan is that he was helping them ‘keep an eye on’ any worrisome Muslim elements in his locality. He was not a troublemaker, he was a healer and a fixer.
The most likely explanation for Khan’s disappearance on the 6th is that he told his minder for the 7/7 exercise that he was not going to be able to make it. . He would have been told to see that the others could make it without him. The bombings were not going to be called off but……now he had presented his minders with a problem that had only one possible solution. His goose was cooked.

This would also explain why the attendant at the filling station where Tanweer filled his car (and argued about the change he was given) said he only saw one other person in Tanweer’s car. Hasib Hussain alone (the bus-bomber) was in the car and, unknown to the pair of them, Khan was by now already dead. This would also explain why the now-suppressed BBC radio 5 news reports from the late morning of the seventh said that two men had been shot in Canary Wharf (rather than three, the supposed train bombers. Hussain had been separated from the others).

Those who have travelled to Beeston and spoken to locals report that, like Khan, Hussain and Tanweer had shown no inclination in their communities towards political or religious radicalism.

The Evidence against ‘The Four’

Looking at the detail of latest narrative laid out before the 7/7 Inquest, it must be admitted that it is now just physically possible that the four caught the last possible train at Luton and rushed from King’s Cross Thameslink to the various subway platforms before detonating their deadly cargos. However, their relaxed demeanour in the very few still photos presented as evidence militates against the probability that they were rushing about madly that morning (especially with all that liquid explosive slopping about on their backs).

Why too in the most CCTV-rich environment on earth are there only a couple of very poor pictures of the four, one at Luton, one at Thameslink, the date and time stamps on which could have easily been photoshopped. Could the photos of Khan have been used from the ‘practice run’ the four carried out on 29th June 2005, just eight days earlier?

The mobile phone evidence places them all on the correct train at the right time. Three things about this though. Firstly, this is new evidence that was not released in the previous 2006 hearing. Why? Second, is it likely that these men would have been texting each other on train they had all boarded together. Finally, this is the kind of evidence easily faked. It is letters and numbers on a piece of paper.

Khan and Tanweer could easily have been talked into making the Jihadi videos that have played such a large part in aiding the public to accept their guilt. They were employees, well-paid for two days work, the practice on June 29th and for the day itself. They were told that the exercise has to be made as realistic as possible. The film would be in the hands of the station staff and other authorities giving them a possible means of intercepting the four. The on-camera ‘threats’ from Khan and Tanweer are vague and unspecific. When Hasina Patel first saw these videos it was reported that she said, “That’s not my husband.” Her brother thought it was Khan. It is most likely that she meant, “ I know him. He would never say such things.”
The ‘bombers’ all had four or more mobile phones each; one of their own private phones and at least three other (so-called) ‘operational’ phones that they are supposed to have used to confound anyone who might attempt to track their communications and obstruct their diabolical plan. It is most likely that these phones were supplied by their minder and that their holding them allowed their ‘handlers’ to track Tanweer and Lindsay down in Canary Wharf after they had panicked and gone on the run, presumably (and naively) hoping to tell their story to the British press who are mostly based there.

Government sources might deny it but there are 2 competing narratives that describe what happened on 7/7/05

1) The official story of four suicide bombers murdering 52 people and injuring hundreds by exploding four bombs on three tube trains and one bus on the morning of 7/7.

2) Forces embedded within the establishment carried out a false-flag attack against the British people. As with nearly all false-flag events, patsies were set up to take the blame for the crime. The four Muslims were completely innocent actors paid to participate in a concurrent anti-terror 'drill'. 


In a court of law physical evidence always trumps excuses, allegations, observations or any other kind of verbal contribution to a case…..

……so….

QUESTION SEVEN

Which of the above narratives more closely matches the facts of the case?


.

Monday, 29 June 2015

How Muslim Parents Might Prevent Their Children Joining ISIS

.


It should be a puzzle to UK Muslims that ISIS shows no interest in the persection and suffering of the Muslim people in Gaza and The West Bank.

If Muslim parents are concerned about their children being radicalised and turned into terrorists by ISIS there is a simple fact they should point out to these would-be Jihadists.

Muslims should be saying (or shouting from the rooftops) that the people ISIS is attacking are groups western governments have clearly identified as being OUR enemies. 

Assad, The Iraqi government and Hezbollah are all allied with and supported by Iran, a country quite clearly identified as THE threat to our interests, and specifically to Israel, in the region.

So.

If you are worried about young Abdul or Aisha slipping off to Turkey for of bit of recreational bombing ask them right now if they really think it is a good idea to go to the Middle East to fight for Israel and US/EU/UK corporate interests.

UPDATE

ISIS kills 17 soldiers in Egypt.

ISIS threatens to topple Hamas.

Nuff said.


.

Friday, 5 December 2014

PROOF: INTERNET TROLLING AND THE WAR AGAINST GOD



WE SHALL DESTROY GOD

3. But even freedom might be harmless and have its place in the State economy without injury to the well-being of the peoples if it rested upon the foundation of faith in God, upon the brotherhood of humanity, unconnected with the conception of equality, which is negatived by the very laws of creation, for they have established subordination. With such a faith as this a people might be governed by a wardship of parishes, and would walk contentedly and humbly under the guiding hand of its spiritual pastor submitting to the dispositions of God upon earth. This is the reason why IT IS INDISPENSABLE FOR US TO UNDERMINE ALL FAITH, TO TEAR OUT OF THE MIND OF THE "GOYIM" THE VERY PRINCIPLE OF GOD-HEAD AND THE SPIRIT, AND TO PUT IN ITS PLACE ARITHMETICAL CALCULATIONS AND MATERIAL NEEDS.

                                                                         Extract from 'The Protocols of Zion, Protocol no. 4'

There is a YouTube clip titled "Christians get smashed to tiny idiotic shards by English Atheists" You will find it here. Note its 850,000 viewings.

Scrolling through the comments, about halfway down the page there is a thread started by one 'Jeff Brown'. If anyone cares to study this thread, particularly its later contributions, they will find textbook proof of organised, dishonest and malicious internet trolling by a group of posters who are, quite obviously an organised 'team'.

At a certain stage, when these people must have got tired of exchanges that they could not win, they all started "replying" to someone called 'Scott Zimmerman'.
It took a while to realise this, but 'Scott Zimmerman' does not exist anywhere on this or any other thread. 
These posters were replying to a non-existent contributor in order to drive those who would challenge their propaganda off the thread and out of public view. 

Further (rather comical) proof of their dishonest methods came when, after  I caught them out, 'Sebastian Weetabix' accused me (banjo234) of being 'Scott Zimmerman'.

Ho, ho.

Notice, too, how these trolls give the non-existent 'Christian protagonist' they attack a Jewish name. Maybe this raised a giggle in the office (on the other hand perhaps this detail, also, is habitual and the joke is too worn out by now to generate even a smile). 

The arguments (pro or anti) are obviously irrelevant to these people (and their employers). All that matters is the propaganda.

Here is a list of the names of the posters (all presenting a slightly different persona) who engaged in this tactic:

Jeff Brown
Denkanator
Sebastian Weetabix
Mr Planx
Jordy Van Ekelen

It is highly improbable that these characters are all the work of one demented God-hater. There are many articles about such trolling online. 

Well, here's another one with the evidence to prove it.

Anyone who studies the comment threads online ('Alternet' particularly) that promote militant atheism (and often are drowning in highly offensive anti-Christian rhetoric) can observe similar exchanges.

I believe close study of the vile attacks on Christianity that appear just about everywhere such debates arise would reveal that this kind of trolling exists on a very large scale. 

Who could hate Christianity and even belief in a creator consciousness we call 'God' so much?

Those who are determined to govern our minds. 

And destroy our very souls.

That's who.


.


Wednesday, 3 December 2014

Chris Spivey and the Murder of Lee Rigby.

.

I don't like criticising others who lambast establishment lies but, in this case, feel compelled to express some concerns regarding the 'work' of Chris Spivey relating to the murder in Woolwich of Lee Rigby.

His article on the matter presents a long and rambling 30,000 word 'analysis' of just about all aspects of the case. It is hard work piling through the masses of material covered and one is bound to wonder why visceral and important material is presented in such an indigestible manner. One also wonders how Mr Spivey managed to glean so much information about so many different characters in so many diverse locations and put it all together into a coherent and superficially convincing narrative.

Last night Chris Spivey made a presentation to the '911keeptalking' group in Victoria, central London. He arrived ten minutes late carrying a dusty laptop and spent 15 minutes trying to set up slides on the computer for his show. He obviously failed because the laptop, though working, was barely used during the following two hours.

This in itself was quite puzzling. How could a man who had researched the Woolwich murder and every character connected to it in such depth, constructed such a complex narrative relating to networks of inter-relationships of the individuals involved and exposed so many subtle lies and deceptions manufactured by the intelligence services.......how could such an individual be so chaotically disorganised.

Preparing for a talk is not rocket science (although to be fair, he said it was his first one...............Nonetheless)

As for the talk itself, Mr. Spivey basically retold the story that appears on his site exactly as it appears on the site. The most striking thing about Spivey's Woolwich narrative is that most of the assertions made which do not directly relate to photographic evidence are unsourced.

Many of us were wondering, 'How on earth did he find out these things?' I was expecting that Mr Spivey would give us some insights into his amazing research skills.

He should have much to boast about.

Would he make clear how he uncovered this massive quantity of information relating to Rigby's family, the personnel connected to his army background, the pallbearers at Rigby's funeral etc..?

No, unfortunately, he would not.

The only time he went to the trouble of discussing a source of information was when he was talking about Rigby's alleged work on the day of the killing. Drummer Rigby put in (or didn't) a 4-hour shift at a "Wedding Exhibition" at the Tower of London. This was work he apparently took on in order to research his own upcoming wedding to the 'fiance' he had quite recently met.

Spivey said he had been able find no trace of this event but received a message out of the blue from a company in Bristol informing him that they had, in fact, been running such a Wedding Exhibition in the Tower on that very day. Well, Spivey said, "This has got to be bollocks!" .....his only stated reason being that... "Bristol is a hotspot of Satanists. It's crawling with them." (or very similar words to that effect).

There must be a little Chris Spivey lurking somewhere in my own psyche because at that point something inside me screamed:

"FOR F***'S SAKE!!!!"

This was as close as we got to discussing sources of evidence supporting Spivey's astonishing narrative before I left the room (an hour early as the experience was, how can I put it?..... 'doing my head in').

I have been told by others in attendance that later on Spivey himself seemed "confused" as to whether Rigby was a real person (as evidenced by lots of his identified 'friends') or a fictional character (as all the photoshopping of images would appear to indicate).

I am not the only one left with the strong sense that Chris Spivey is not presenting his own work.

He has learnt a narrative but has no information to back up or explain from whence his astounding 'knowledge' relating to the Woolwich event has come.

It is impossible not to strongly suspect that his story was put together by a creative writing team working within the bowels of MI5.

There is probably a great deal of truth in Spivey's narrative ('Revelation of the Method' being a regular element relating to crimes of the modern state) but enough misdirection to make his information provably debunkable and, therefore, worse than useless.

It is MI5's policy to 'own' the leadership of the opposition when it comes to all their pranks. They need an 'alternative' figurehead or organisation to (mis)represent any false-flag event to the masses should doubts seep into the public mind and go viral (the mainstream media must appear to be 'fair' and 'even-handed' after all).

It is obvious that MI5 will behave in this way.

It's their job.

In the same way that J7 failed to usefully challenge massive anomalies and provable establishment lies relating to the 7/7 murders we now have a (manufactured) leading voice "exposing" the Woolwich terror event. A voice that discredits itself by the relentless obscenities that punctuate Spivey's website narrative (he did little swearing during his presentation in Victoria, which demonstrated to my satisfaction that the chosen mode of expression he uses in his articles is gratuitous).
Why, we must ask, would he present such serious accusations in a manner that is so damaging and discrediting to the content of the material itself? Like much else, this makes little sense.

Therefore.

A word of warning to those who might swallow the Spivey guff wholesale.

Don't.

.




Saturday, 26 July 2014

WHY DO OUR 'ANTI-HATE' LAWS NOT APPLY TO ORTHODOX JEWS?

.


I have not yet been able to find a link to the 'consultation document' referred to into the letter copied at the foot of this article. However, its message is familiar and, however outrageous, unsurprising.

It appears that School Inspectors will be collecting evidence in future with the purpose that, quote,

" the Government could take draconian action against any school (state or private) which does not ‘actively promote’ equality on grounds including:

  • sexual orientation
  • transsexualism
  • marriage or civil partnership
  • religion or belief...."

As the Frankfurt Schoolers have recommended, society must be re-engineered such that no kind of 'inequality', 'racism', 'religious discrimination', 'nationalism' or 'sexual discrimination' will be tolerated.

In fact everything is to be tolerated excepting 'intolerance'. This most certainly will not be tolerated. If this Jewish gibberish isn't giving you a headache by now you probably haven't got a head (and this is, presumably, what "your" government are relying on).

Intolerance will be destroyed with an iron fist. 

Don't imagine you will be allowed a career in teaching within our wonderfully tolerant new UK if you harbour ideas of your own. Well, to be fair, you can think whatever you like provided you do not utter those thoughts out loud.

That's how unbelievably LIBERAL the UK is going to be!

GET USED TO IT, YOU IDIOTIC, BRAINLESS PEASANT!

There is one group to which none of the above will apply, of course. That is the group, the specific ethnic and religious group, that invented all this deadly rubbish. 

I refer to the Luciferian, racist, supremacist mostly non-Semitic, Orthodox Jews who (in concert with their money-lending partners) currently hold the entire western world by the throat.

I urge readers to take these people at their own word.

Let's demand a little 'anti-racism'. 

Let us demand 'equality'.

Let us demand 'religious tolerance' and an end to 'hate speech'.

Contact your local MP and demand he fully defend these principles and apply them to EVERYBODY.

Make the creep crawl. Pursue him or her with this issue until you force a direct answer to the question.

Here's a little information that he might begin taking seriously:

FROM THE TALMUD

".....Christ is in hell drowning in boiling excrement...."
According to the Talmud (Gittin 57a)

Whosoever disobeys the rabbis deserves death and will be boiled in hot excrement in hell.
 —BT Erubin 21b.

Mary, the Mother of Jesus, was a prostitute.
—BT Sanhedrin 106b. BT Sanhedrin 67a. Shabbath 104b.

All gentile women without exception are: “Niddah, Shifchah, Goyyah and Zonah” (menstrual filth, slaves, heathens and prostitutes). 
—BT Sanhedrin 81b - 82a.

The New Testament books of the Christians are to be burned whenever possible.
 —BT Shabbath 116a.

"The laws (of fairness) mentioned above only apply between two Jewish neighbors. Gentiles do not necessarily respect these principles and, hence, there is no obligation to show them such consideration in return.” Rabbi Ezra Basri, ibid., vol. 4, chapter 2. 

All of the inhabitants of the world are compelled to accept the Noachide laws. If any non-Jew does not accept these laws he should be killed.
 
 Rabbi Moses Maimonides (The “Rambam”), Mishneh Torah: Hilchot Melachim U'Milchamoteihem ("Laws of Kings and Wars"), Section 8, Halacha 10. 

Only Jews are human. Non-Jews are not human. 
—BT Bava Metzia 114b. BT Kerithoth 6b and 58a. 

Regarding a Jew stealing from a non-Jew, the act is permitted. 
— BT Sanhedrin 57a. 

Jews may use lies ("subterfuges") to circumvent a gentile. 
—BT Baba Kamma 113a.

If a Jew is tempted to do evil, he should go to a city where he is not known and do the evil there.
—BT Moed Kattan 17a. 

One could continue these kind of quotations for a very long time......and they get worse, if anything, when the Orthodox Jewish  'good book' moves on to sexual matters.

Do we have a right to object to the blasphemies against Christ and his mother, to the statement that non-Jews are not even human, to the attacks against gentile women, to the statements saying that crimes against gentiles are no crimes at all....etc.

Do we not have a right to demand, measured against anti-racism and anti-religious discrimination laws as they stand, that no school should be allowed to propagate such filth, that this kind of poison should not be inflicted on innocent young Jewish minds........

that on the basis of the content of this foul book and in respect to UK legislation (and OFSTED rules as they stand) that:

1)  All Yeshivas be forced to close 

immediately.

2) All Synangogues, being active centres of 

hate-speech and anti-gentile propaganda,  be 

shut down immediately until such time as Orthodox Jewry formally recognises non-Jews as being human and renounces its historic (and clearly ongoing) committment to the destruction of the gentile nations. 

This is the only logical response to the

continued imposition and onslaught of 

supremacist* Jewish gibberish against the 

decent majority population of the UK (and

other western societies) whose tolerance will

one day soon surely wear very thin indeed.

The Jewish People, by the way, are the first and foremost victims of this Satanic Cult. Listen to what Israeli writer Jossi Gurvitz has to say about The Talmud:





*Let anyone who thinks the motive behind the secular, humanist, tolerance, equality agendas being pressed on all western societies is the desire for equality, tolerance etc......let them read the complete thread of Jewish variations on a supremacist theme:
The Book of Deuteronomy
The Talmud
The Protocols of Zion
The Communist Manifesto
The writings of the Frankfurt School of Psychology.

In these writings (of Orthodox Jews to themselves) they make it very plain indeed what they are really about.

















Letter to your MP for copy-and-pasting (just trying to help). Demand a reply, by the way.


Dear ...........,

I have received the following from The Christian Institute (an extract)

.......It appears that School Inspectors will be collecting evidence in future with the purpose that, quote,

" the Government could take draconian action against any school (state or private) which does not ‘actively promote’ equality on grounds including:

  • sexual orientation
  • transsexualism
  • marriage or civil partnership
  • religion or belief...."

It appears that everything is to be tolerated excepting 'intolerance'. This most certainly will not be tolerated. 

Intolerance will be crushed with an iron fist. 

A person will not be allowed a career in teaching within our wonderfully tolerant new UK if they harbour ideas of their own. Well, to be fair, they can think whatever you like provided they do not utter those thoughts out loud.

That's how unbelievably LIBERAL the UK is going to be!

Howeve, there is one group to which none of the above will apply, of course. That is the group, the specific ethnic and religious group, that invented all this deadly rubbish (as they most provably did).

Here are some quotes from The Talmud, the Orthodox Jewish Holy Book:


".....Christ is in hell drowning in boiling excrement...."
According to the Talmud (Gittin 57a)

Whosoever disobeys the rabbis deserves death and will be boiled in hot excrement in hell.
 —BT Erubin 21b.

Mary, the Mother of Jesus, was a prostitute.
—BT Sanhedrin 106b. BT Sanhedrin 67a. Shabbath 104b.

All gentile women without exception are: “Niddah, Shifchah, Goyyah and Zonah” (menstrual filth, slaves, heathens and prostitutes). 
—BT Sanhedrin 81b - 82a.

The New Testament books of the Christians are to be burned whenever possible.
 —BT Shabbath 116a.

"The laws (of fairness) mentioned above only apply between two Jewish neighbors. Gentiles do not necessarily respect these principles and, hence, there is no obligation to show them such consideration in return.” Rabbi Ezra Basri, ibid., vol. 4, chapter 2. 

All of the inhabitants of the world are compelled to accept the Noachide laws. If any non-Jew does not accept these laws he should be killed.
 
 Rabbi Moses Maimonides (The “Rambam”), Mishneh Torah: Hilchot Melachim U'Milchamoteihem ("Laws of Kings and Wars"), Section 8, Halacha 10. 

Only Jews are human. Non-Jews are not human. 
—BT Bava Metzia 114b. BT Kerithoth 6b and 58a. 

Regarding a Jew stealing from a non-Jew, the act is permitted. 
— BT Sanhedrin 57a. 

Jews may use lies ("subterfuges") to circumvent a gentile. 
—BT Baba Kamma 113a.

If a Jew is tempted to do evil, he should go to a city where he is not known and do the evil there.—BT Moed Kattan 17a. 

One could continue these kind of quotations for a very long time......and they get worse, if anything, when the Orthodox Jewish  'good book' moves on to sexual matters.

Do we have a right to object to the blasphemies against Christ and his mother, to the statement that non-Jews are not even human, to the attacks against gentile women, to the statements saying that crimes against gentiles are no crimes at all....etc.

Do we not have a right to demand, measured against anti-racism and anti-religious discrimination laws as they stand, that no school should be allowed to propagate such filth, that this kind of poison should not be inflicted on innocent young Jewish minds........

that on the basis of the content of this foul book and in respect to UK legislation (and OFSTED rules as they stand) that:

1)  All Yeshivas be forced to close 

immediately.

2) All Synangogues, being active centres of 

hate-speech and anti-gentile propaganda,  be 

shut down immediately until such time as non-Jews are formally recognised as being human and the historic (and clearly ongoing) Jewish commitment to 'the destruction of nations' be publicly and collectively renounced. 

This is the only logical response to the

continued imposition and onslaught of 

supremacist* Jewish gibberish against the 

decent majority population of the UK (and

other western societies) whose tolerance will

one day soon surely wear very thin indeed.

So, will you support Christians like myself in our drive against hate-speech and gross Jewish religious and racist discriminatory propaganda?

I demand to be recognised as a human being at the very least! Is that too much to ask in your secular, liberal 'equality'-obsessed universe?

Sincerely,











Dear supporter,
The Government is consulting on plans to greatly expand its powers to intervene in schools in England. There has been an astonishingly brief consultation period of just six weeks, when many people are away. We are seeking to fully explore the implications.
Under the planned changes to school inspection requirements, the Government could take draconian action against any school (state or private) which does not ‘actively promote’ equality on grounds including:
  • sexual orientation
  • transsexualism
  • marriage or civil partnership
  • religion or belief
The consultation paper is advocating what it calls “British values” for all schools. But promoting British values should not mean promoting political correctness. The Government is even saying that schools should challenge parents who contradict equality.
We are alarmed at the invasive nature of these proposals, which give vast scope for school inspectors to hassle individual schools, including any state or private school with a Christian ethos. Under the plans, the Secretary of State would not need to go to court to close a school for failing to actively promote equality.
The proposals appear to be a rushed response to the recent ‘Trojan Horse’ scandal in Birmingham, where certain state-funded schools were taken over by governors seeking to impose harsh Islamic practices. While we don’t for one minute defend the extreme political ideology uncovered at those schools, the proposed changes completely miss the target.
Imposing the equality agenda on all schools is a strange solution to the ‘Trojan Horse’ findings. What does opening up girls’ lavatories to boys who want to cross-dress have to do with countering extremism?
The consultation document also says that new equality requirements will be breached by a “failure to address homophobia; or where prejudice against those of other faiths is encouraged or not adequately challenged by the school”. Where does that leave a teacher in a Christian school explaining biblical beliefs about the family or about salvation being found in Christ alone? Will lessons on John 14:6 be banned? This could effectively turn into a new ‘religious hatred’ law for every school in the land.
Enforcing secularism on all schools is the wrong response to the problems uncovered in the Birmingham education system. Legal powers were already available to deal with the alarming activities there, but over several years there was no will to enforce them until the more extraordinary revelations came to light.
The new proposals will not solve the problem. In fact, they could be selectively applied so that inspectors tip-toe round schools upholding extreme political ideologies, but use their new powers to come down hard on Christian schools which don’t go along with political correctness.
Please pray:
  • For wisdom for Christian Institute staff working on this issue.
  • For Christian schools and Christian teachers to find out about the consultation and respond.
  • For the Government to think again and halt these invasive plans.
We have seen answers to prayer in recent days. Please keep praying.
Yours in Christ,
Colin Hart
Colin Hart
Director
The Christian Institute.


.