The “brain-drain” that is occurring by wholesale importing migrants from regions of low HDI, or human development indexes, (in the Middle East and Africa) to regions of high human development indexes (in Europe) will likely spell disaster for maintaining the integrity and composition of the archetypal Western nation state.
A nation state, its qualities and identity, whether good or bad, is simply a direct result of the collection of individuals that compose it.
Because of this, the development of the individuals that make up the state is crucial in defining the quality of the collective state as a whole, and a crucial factor that should be heeded.
Different groups of individuals take on various group characteristics, genetic and environmental, so when dealing with migrants from different demographic groups, we must consider this as a factor.
Questions that need to be asked: are these individuals morally sound? Are they intellectually adept? What are their general qualities and flaws? What is the provenance of a demographic, how compatible is a group of people with the values, systems, politics, and culture of another group?
Social demographics and its impact on a nation state.
Is the homogeneity of the essence of a state at every level of its definition upheld when a given group is introduced into the demographic equation?
What biology and inherent predispositions underpins the differential between populations, how much can environmental factors be attributed to these differences or similarities?
At the root of what I’m trying to say is that our excessive liberal attitudes and open-doored pathological altruism needs to be re-thought and addressed accordingly.
If we go by the evidence, a brain-drain will occur that will affect the West negatively.
Science proves this brain-drain trend to be grounded in empirical, demographic reality; as the more educated, genetically adept native Europeans’ birth rate is declining and migrant birth rate increasing, a large brain-drain will occur within a few decades as the two populations intersperse, with one rapidly replacing the other in its prominence — the devastating affects of this brain-drain has yet to be felt this early on in the process, but it will come in the end.
If seeing the rampant spike in migrant-caused crime hadn’t already convinced you that there is a demographic problem brewing — the strong, empirical correlation between national average IQ and national success will:
As you can see, the Western nations tend to be placed in higher levels of national success.The migrant crisis is importing chaos into an equation of order.The correlation, and very likely causation, is indisputable – and needs to be considered with regards to the engineered European migrant crisis.
Europe is committing suicide. Or at least its leaders have decided to commit suicide. Whether the European people choose to go along with this is, naturally, another matter. When I say that Europe is in the process of killing itself, I do not mean that the burden of European Commission regulation has become overbearing or that the European Convention on Human Rights has not done enough to satisfy the demands of a particular community.
I mean that the civilisation we know as Europe is in the process of committing suicide and that neither Britain nor any other western European country can avoid that fate, because we all appear to suffer from the same symptoms and maladies.
As a result, by the end of the lifespans of most people currently alive, Europe will not be Europe and the peoples of Europe will have lost the only place in the world we had to call home.
Europe today has little desire to reproduce itself, fight for itself or even take its own side in an argument. Those in power seem persuaded that it would not matter if the people and culture of Europe were lost to the world.
There is no single cause of the present sickness. The culture produced by the tributaries of Judaeo-Christian culture, the ancient Greeks and Romans, and the discoveries of the Enlightenment has not been levelled by nothing. But the final act has come about because of two simultaneous concatenations — sets of linked events — from which it is now all but impossible to recover.
The first is the mass movement of peoples into Europe. In all western European countries this process began after the Second World War due to labour shortages. Soon Europe got hooked on the migration and could not stop the flow even if it had wanted to.
The result was that what had been Europe — the home of the European peoples — gradually became a home for the entire world. The places that had been European gradually became somewhere else.
All the time Europeans found ways to pretend this influx could work. By pretending, for instance, that such immigration was normal. Or that if integration did not happen with the first generation then it might happen with their children, grandchildren or another generation yet to come. Or that it didn’t matter whether people integrated or not.
All the time we waved away the greater likelihood that it just wouldn’t work. This is a conclusion that the migration crisis of recent years has simply accelerated.
Which brings me to the second concatenation. For even the mass movement of millions of people into Europe would not sound such a final note for the continent were it not for the fact that (coincidentally or otherwise) at the same time Europe lost faith in its beliefs, traditions and legitimacy.
More than any other continent or culture in the world today, Europe is deeply weighed down with guilt for its past. Alongside this outgoing version of self-distrust runs a more introverted version of the same guilt. For there is also the problem in Europe of an existential tiredness and a feeling that perhaps for Europe the story has run out and a new story must be allowed to begin.
Mass immigration — the replacement of large parts of the European populations by other people — is one way in which this new story has been imagined: a change, we seemed to think, was as good as a rest. Such existential civilisational tiredness is not a uniquely modern European phenomenon, but the fact that a society should feel like it has run out of steam at precisely the moment when a new society has begun to move in cannot help but lead to vast, epochal changes.
Had it been possible to discuss these matters, some solution might have been possible. Looking back, it is remarkable how restricted we made our discussion, even while we opened our home to the world.
A thousand years ago the peoples of Genoa and Florence were not as intermingled as they now are, but today they are all recognisably Italian, and tribal differences have tended to lessen rather than grow with time.
The current thinking appears to be that at some stage in the years ahead the peoples of Eritrea and Afghanistan too will be intermingled within Europe as the Genoans and Florentines are now melded into Italy. The skin colour of individuals from Eritrea and Afghanistan may be different, their ethnic origins may be further afield, but Europe will still be Europe and its people will continue to mingle in the spirit of Voltaire and St Paul, Dante, Goethe and Bach.
As with so many popular delusions, there is something in this. The nature of Europe has always shifted and — as trading cities such as Venice show — has included a grand and uncommon receptiveness to foreign ideas and influence. From the ancient Greeks and Romans onwards, the peoples of Europe sent out ships to scour the world and report back on what they found. Rarely, if ever, did the rest of the world return their curiosity in kind, but nevertheless the ships went out and returned with tales and discoveries that melded into the air of Europe. The receptivity was prodigious: it was not, however, boundless.
The question of where the boundaries of the culture lay is endlessly argued over by anthropologists and cannot be solved. But there were boundaries. Europe was never, for instance, a continent of Islam. Yet the awareness that our culture is constantly, subtly changing has deep European roots. We know that the Greeks today are not the same people as the ancient Greeks. We know that the English are not the same today as they were a millennium ago, nor the French the French. And yet they are recognisably Greek, English and French and all are European.
In these and other identities we recognise a degree of cultural succession: a tradition that remains with certain qualities (positive as well as negative), customs and behaviours. We recognise the great movements of the Normans, Franks and Gauls brought about great changes. And we know from history that some movements affect a culture relatively little in the long term, whereas others can change it irrevocably.
Religion has retreated in Europe, replaced by ‘human rights’
The problem comes not with an acceptance of change, but with the knowledge that when those changes come too fast or are too different we become something else, including something we may never have wanted to be.
At the same time we are confused over how this is meant to work. While generally agreeing that it is possible for an individual to absorb a particular culture (given the right degree of enthusiasm both from the individual and the culture) whatever their skin colour, we know that we Europeans cannot become whatever we like. We cannot become Indian or Chinese, for instance. And yet we are expected to believe that anyone in the world can move to Europe and become European.
If being “European” is not about race, then it is even more imperative that it is about “values”. This is what makes the question “What are European values?” so important. Yet this is another debate about which we are wholly confused.
Are we, for instance, Christian? In the 2000s this debate had a focal point in the row over the wording of the new EU constitution and the absence of any mention of the continent’s Christian heritage. The debate not only divided Europe geographically and politically, it also pointed to a glaring aspiration.
For religion had not only retreated in western Europe. In its wake there arose a desire to demonstrate that in the 21st century Europe had a self-supporting structure of rights, laws and institutions that could exist even without the source that had arguably given them life.
In the place of religion came the ever-inflating language of “human rights” (itself a concept of Christian origin). We left unresolved the question of whether or not our acquired rights were reliant on beliefs that the continent had ceased to hold, or whether they existed of their own accord. This was, at the very least, an extremely big question to have left unresolved while vast new populations were being expected to “integrate”.
An equally significant question erupted at the time around the position and purpose of the nation state. From the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648 up to the late 20th century the nation state in Europe had generally been regarded not only as the best guarantor of constitutional order and liberal rights but the ultimate guarantor of peace.
Yet this certainty also eroded. European figures such as Chancellor Helmut Kohl of Germany in 1996 insisted that “The nation state . . . cannot solve the great problems of the 21st century.” Disintegration of the nation states of Europe into one large integrated political union was so important, Kohl insisted, that it was in fact “a question of war and peace in the 21st century”.
Others disagreed, and 20 years later just over half of British people who voted in the EU referendum demonstrated that they were unpersuaded by Kohl’s argument. But, once again, whatever one’s views on the matter, this was a huge question to leave unresolved at a time of vast population change.
While unsure of ourselves at home, we made final efforts at extending our values abroad. Yet whenever our governments and armies got involved in anything in the name of these “human rights” — Iraq in 2003, Libya in 2011 — we seemed to make things worse and ended up in the wrong. When the Syrian civil war began, people cried for western nations to intervene in the name of the human rights that were undoubtedly being violated. But there was no appetite to protect such rights because whether or not we believed in them at home, we had certainly lost faith in an ability to advance them abroad.
At some stage it began to seem possible that what had been called “the last utopia” — the first universal system that divorced the rights of man from the say of gods or tyrants — might comprise a final failed European aspiration. If that is indeed the case, then it leaves Europeans in the 21st century without any unifying idea capable of ordering the present or approaching the future.
Europe has little desire to reproduce itself, fight for itself or even take its own side in an argument
At any time the loss of all unifying stories about our past or ideas about what to do with our present or future would be a serious conundrum. But during a time of momentous societal change and upheaval the results are proving fatal. The world is coming into Europe at precisely the moment that Europe has lost sight of what it is. And while the movement of millions of people from other cultures into a strong and assertive culture might have worked, the movement of millions of people into a guilty, jaded and dying culture cannot.
Even now Europe’s leaders talk of an invigorated effort to incorporate the millions of new arrivals. These efforts too will fail. If Europe is going to become a home for the world, it must search for a definition of itself that is wide enough to encompass the world. This means that in the period before this aspiration collapses our values become so wide as to become meaninglessly shallow.
So whereas European identity in the past could be attributed to highly specific, not to mention philosophically and historically deep foundations (the rule of law, the ethics derived from the continent’s history and philosophy), today the ethics and beliefs of Europe — indeed the identity and ideology of Europe — have become about “respect”, “tolerance” and (most self-abnegating of all) “diversity”.
Such shallow self-definitions may get us through a few more years, but they have no chance at all of being able to call on the deeper loyalties that societies must be able to reach if they are going to survive for long.
This is just one reason why it is likely that our European culture, which has lasted all these centuries and shared with the world such heights of human achievement, will not survive.
As recent elections in Austria and the rise of Alternative for Germany seem to prove, while the likelihood of cultural erosion remains irresistible, the options for cultural defence continue to be unacceptable. Even after the tumultuous years they have just had, the French electorate go to the polls next weekend to choose between more of a disastrous status quo or a member of the Le Pen family.
And all the time the flow into Europe continues. Over the Easter weekend alone European naval vessels collected more than 8,000 African migrants from the seas around Italy and brought them into Europe. Such a flow — which used to be unusual — is now routine, apparently unstoppable and also endless.
In The World of Yesterday, published in 1942, the Austrian writer Stefan Zweig wrote that in the years leading up to the Second World War, “I felt that Europe, in its state of derangement, had passed its own death sentence.” Only his timing was out. It would take several more decades before that death sentence was carried out — by ourselves on ourselves.
High ranking Freemason, Albert Pike wrote in his infamous book ‘Morals & Dogma’ about how the global elites intend to clash the major cultures of faith (Christians/Jews with Islam) in order to bring about one with no faith except praise of the state. This is all tied into the pursuit of a communist world order. By destroying the ‘Opiate’ (religion/faith), you can generate a cultureless superstate that has no faith, and so will worship the state (Satan’s dominion), the next realm in line after God’s.
The principles of abrahamic faith, especially Christianity and Judaism, generally value a strong form of liberty that encourages its adherents to question the state’s every move, and analyze laws according to the Bible; and to never follow laws if they defy the holy written instruction.
It does not matter whether you are religious or not, it is a fact that the holy scriptures help hugely to uphold decent morality, liberty, individual freedoms and encourages its followers to obey this basis over any corruptible law made by man; laws which always change to favour greed and self-service in many cases, as seen throughout history. The Bible and its accompanying faith is the safeguard against total tyranny. In Nazi Germany not too long ago, youths were indoctrinated to praise Adolf Hitler as some God, it worked, and the nation fell into darkness and fascism – now imagine that but on a global level, the current controllers have the levers to global power nearly fully secured, all they need is the right disaster to make everything fall into place.
We must distinguish between men not following these Biblical instructions and killing people at the behest of the orders of another man, and the people that actually follow the instructions, word for word. The elites want us to believe that religion is all bundled into one, and the actions of its adherents define what their respective faith means fundamentally, which it simply does not. They want a conflict so exhaustive that people will leave behind faith and embrace the saviours, who engineered it all, the elite world government which will be branded as our great unifier, the saviour.
By igniting a conflict of major proportions between the faiths, perhaps even one of world-war scale devastation; the aftermath from such chaos can the elites pass legislation, with massive popular support, to outlaw all faith indefinitely. This comes from the ‘new world order’ term, ‘Order out of chaos’ – their guiding principle and modus operandi (mode of operation), you create a problem and create a solution which is a change that you wanted before any problem existed; but would not have been supported due to the absence of any problem.
Make the Muslims hate Christians/Jews by bombing their nations, make the Christians hate the Muslims by showing us these staged beheadings and bombings, then bring a bunch of them here, Europe and the West. (the areas they want to subjugate and control).
The Migrant Crisis
For a long time, I’m talking hundreds of years back, have the elites been planning to use Islam to destabilize and overthrow all liberty-loving abrahamic faiths, and put the final nail in the coffin towards ushering in a ‘New World Order’ – replete with a single government, language, currency, army, religion (statist/satanism). This is done by the use false pretenses to bomb the middle east by forming and funding fake terror groups (all proven to be CIA trained) such as Al-Qaeda and ISIS (Daesh), even using self-inflicted ‘terrorist’ attacks such as 9/11 to rally public support to get into the middle-east, dehumanize the Islamic locals, and wreak havoc and expand the western colony of Israel (Jewish/Christian) and support this colony in its persecution of Palestine – such violent persecution by a western colony is seen across the middle east and paints the entire west poorly, this will anger the local Muslims and put a target on who they need to despise. The carpet bombing of near-eastern cities also leaves the local populaces bereaving, homeless and enraged by the ‘collateral’ damage of US airstrikes, a constant presence of US/NATO military personnel further helps to instill a sense of constant occupational colonialism.
You must understand there was no reason for going to war in Iraq, but the entire West was tricked into thinking it was because ‘evil muslims had nukes’ – yet when the US and NATO barraged into Iraq we have locals who have not seen the same information as those in the West and assume it is hellbent imperialism, their social circles will now paint the west as terrorists, and in the west our media paints them as terrorists. This is the ruse being used to divide and conquer us.
Then, by opening the border floodgates and tempting as many near-east and north-African Islamic migrants into Europe and the West as possible, coupled with ‘terrorist’ attacks that are always ‘Islamic’ – can the elites put two opposite cultures and faiths that dislike each-other into close proximity, the result is that you can destroy the undesirable ’cause’ of all this, the faiths.
It is a free-for-all by design, they will let anyone in now – it is all a part of the destabilization grand plan to destroy western liberty and induce a godless, communist world government run by slaves and a significantly decreased world population of around 300 million.
Albert Pike’s Letters
The following is taken from an anonymous interpretation of Albert Pike’s letters, I encourage you to make your own conclusions, Albert Pike was part of an organization founded on deception to conceal its true motives from the under-initiated.
“The Third World War must be fomented by taking advantage of the differences caused by the “agentur” of the “Illuminati” between the political Zionists and the leaders of Islamic World. The war must be conducted in such a way that Islam (the Moslem Arabic World) and political Zionism (the State of Israel) mutually destroy each other. Meanwhile the other nations, once more divided on this issue will be constrained to fight to the point of complete physical, moral, spiritual and economical exhaustion…We shall unleash the Nihilists and the atheists, and we shall provoke a formidable social cataclysm which in all its horror will show clearly to the nations the effect of absolute atheism, origin of savagery and of the most bloody turmoil. Then everywhere, the citizens, obliged to defend themselves against the world minority of revolutionaries, will exterminate those destroyers of civilization, and the multitude, disillusioned with Christianity, whose deistic spirits will from that moment be without compass or direction, anxious for an ideal, but without knowing where to render its adoration, will receive the true light through the universal manifestation of the pure doctrine of Lucifer, brought finally out in the public view. This manifestation will result from the general reactionary movement which will follow the destruction of Christianity and atheism, both conquered and exterminated at the same time.”.
The true name of Satan, the Kabalists say, is that of Yahveh reversed; for Satan is not a black god but the negation of God. The Devil is the personification of Atheism or Idolatry.
World War I . . .
Pike’s letter to Mazzini states:
The First World War must be brought about in order to permit the Illuminati to overthrow the power of the Czars in Russia and of making that country a fortress of atheistic Communism. The divergences caused by the “agentur” (agents) of the Illuminati between the British and Germanic Empires will be used to foment this war. At the end of the war, Communism will be built and used in order to destroy the other governments and in order to weaken the religions.
Mission accomplished. World War I started in August of 1914. By the end of October 1916, Russia had lost between 1,600,000 and 1,800,000 soldiers, with an additional 2,000,000 prisoners of war and 1,000,000 missing, all making up a total of nearly 5,000,000 men lost.
These staggering losses played a definite role in preparing the Russian Revolution. During that Revolution, Russian Emperor Nicholas II, a Christian, abdicated following the Bolshevik communist Revolution of 1917. Nicholas II, his wife, his son, his four daughters, the family’s medical doctor, the Emperor’s footman, the Empress’ maidservant, and the family’s cook were executed in the same room by the Bolsheviks on the night of 16/17 of July 1918.
Christianity and all religions were then banned in the Soviet Union. Approximately 61,911,000 people, 54,769,000 of them citizens, were murdered by the Communist Party from 1917 to 1987.
World War I also resulted in the League of Nations, the failed predecessor of world government under the United Nations.
It must be noted that President Woodrow Wilson provided Leon Trotsky with a passport to return to Russia to “carry forward” the revolution, while Wall Street funded the Bolshevik Revolution as documented by Professor Antony Sutton.
The United States entered World War I based on the sinking of the USS Lusitania false flag operation, where nearly 1200 civilians were massacred to justify war on another continent.
Approximately 11,016,000 individuals were slaughtered during World War I.
World War II
Pike’s letter states:
The Second World War must be fomented by taking advantage of the differences between the Fascists and the political Zionists. This war must be brought about so that Nazism is destroyed and that the political Zionism be strong enough to institute a sovereign state of Israel in Palestine. During the Second World War, International Communism must become strong enough in order to balance Christendom, which would be then restrained and held in check until the time when we would need it for the final social cataclysm.
World government was formed as the United Nations, which sits on land donated by the masters of usury known as the Rockefeller family. The UN represents the end of national sovereignty and is the institution that globalist bankers use to enslave mankind with carbon taxes, gun control, IMF financing schemes, and created crisis and scarcity of resources.
After World War II, the Cold War began. Communism (the Soviet Union) was made strong enough to balance Christendom (Western Civilization) in a Hegelian dialectic of thesis vs. antithesis and Pike hopes the eventual synthesis will be Satanism. The Cold War was also useful in justifying insane military expenditures and nuclear weapon proliferation to a public preoccupied with entertainment.
Approximately 59,028,000 people were slaughtered during World War II.
The Third World War must be fomented by taking advantage of the differences caused by the “agentur” of the “Illuminati” between the political Zionists and the leaders of Islamic World. The war must be conducted in such a way that Islam (the Moslem Arabic World) and political Zionism (the State of Israel) mutually destroy each other. Meanwhile the other nations, once more divided on this issue will be constrained to fight to the point of complete physical, moral, spiritual and economical exhaustion …We shall unleash the Nihilists and the atheists, and we shall provoke a formidable social cataclysm which in all its horror will show clearly to the nations the effect of absolute atheism, origin of savagery and of the most bloody turmoil. Then everywhere, the citizens, obliged to defend themselves against the world minority of revolutionaries, will exterminate those destroyers of civilization, and the multitude, disillusioned with Christianity, whose deistic spirits will from that moment be without compass or direction, anxious for an ideal, but without knowing where to render its adoration, will receive the true light through the universal manifestation of the pure doctrine of Lucifer, brought finally out in the public view. This manifestation will result from the general reactionary movement which will follow the destruction of Christianity and atheism, both conquered and exterminated at the same time.
One could argue that the Third World War started with the Arab-Israeli War of 1948 over the UN Partition plan of land. Of course, Israel and its neighbors have had weekly or monthly conflicts since then, many of which bordering on short wars like the Six Day War. Thus, the Moslem Arabic World and political Zionism are fighting each other as Pike hoped they would.
One could argue that in addition to supporting Israeli Zionists, the U.S. entered World War III in 1951 with Operation Ajax, a covert operation by the US and British intelligence agencies in the early 1950s to topple Iran’s first democratically-elected government and replace it with a dictatorship. The operation included false-flag terror that resulted in the deaths of some 300 people.
World War III was further escalated by the Fist Gulf War, essentially fought over oil revenues. Let us not forget the Highway of Death in which retreating Iraqi soldiers and civilians were massacred by U.S./Coalition airpower like shooting fish in a barrel. The bodies were never counted.
In the Second Gulf War, the United States attacked Iraq under the false pretenses that Saddam Hussein had connections to Pentagon asset Al-Qaeda and/or was developing weapons of mass destruction to use against Americans. Some estimates state that over one million Iraqi deaths were caused by U.S occupation of Iraq not to mention over a trillion dollars paid to the military industrial complex.
The war escalated further when on July 3, 1988, Flight 655, an Iranian passenger airliner was shot down over the Strait of Hormuz by the US Navy, killing all 290 civilians aboard. In 2000, The U.S. warship’s commander, William C. Rogers III, was given the Legion of Merit by George Bush, Sr. for his “service as a commanding officer.”
The mainstream media is reporting that North Korea is testing nuclear weapons and has threatened the U.S. and South Korean forces with “miserable destruction.” A CBS headline reads “North Korea Vows Nuclear Strike Against U.S. “ Yet, the American media refuses to report that the U.S. military provides equipment to North Korea using secret flights.
Or maybe the Third World War will feature the U.S. fighting communist China. Of Course, China is only a world power because Rockefeller, Nixon and Kissinger provided every incentive for U.S. manufacturers to relocate there in a grand act of treason.
As David Rockefeller (Chase Bank, CFR, Trilateral Commission, Bilderberg Group) said:
Whatever the price of the Chinese Revolution [nearly 40 million people murdered by democide], it has obviously succeeded not only in producing more efficient and dedicated administration, but also in fostering high morale and community of purpose. The social experiment in China under Chairman Mao’s leadership is one of the most important and successful in human history.
It looks like we are being set up again. Just as Anwar Al-Awlaki, Al-Qaeda’s number two leader, was a special guest of military brass at the Pentagon within months after the Sept. 11, 2001, false flag attacks, a Chinese general who once threatened to use nuclear weapons against hundreds of U.S. cities will visit the Pentagon this week as part of a U.S.-China military exchange program.
World War III has already begun and there is every indication that it will continue to escalate into the “formidable social cataclysm” that Pike planned to usher in Lucifer’s world government.
What Pike Didn’t Tell Us
Albert Pike’s letter calling for three world wars didn’t state that the New World Order should confiscate guns, create a police state and eliminate political dissidents in a United States holocaust. It should be noted that much to the New World Order’s dismay, U.S. troops won’t commit treason so foreign troops and drone warfare will be required.
During the last year the Department of Homeland Security has ordered 2 billion rounds, enough ammunition to fight the Iraq war for thirty years. However, DHS ammo is not used for war; it is to be used domestically. The majority of the ammo purchased by the DHS are hollow point bullets (one order alone amounted to 450 million of them), which are completely unsuitable for training purposes because they cost significantly more money compared to standard firing range bullets.
In addition to the ammo, the DHS paid $2 million dollars to a company that makes shooting targets that include images of children, pregnant women and elderly gun owners in residential settings.
While the Obama and the NWO are try to pass gun control/confiscation legislation, the DHS purchased 7,000 full-auto assault rifles to be used inside the United States, calling them “personal defense weapons” that could be used in urban warfare.
The Obama Administration has also published a memo that puts forth a “legal justification” for the President to order the drone assassination of any American citizen he names. Maybe the treat of drone attack will be used to fill the FEMA camps.
Like a U.S. Army document that outlines plans for prisoners, including U.S. citizens, to be re-educated in detention camps, it’s worth reminding ourselves of the fact that Barack Obama’s political mentor, Weather Underground terrorist Bill Ayers, once called for precisely the same thing. When Ayers was asked what he would do with Americans that refused to convert to communism, he said that 25 million Americans would be “eliminated” in concentration camps.
Perhaps a civil war within the United States will begin with economic collapse and an attempted gun confiscation. With the economy in shambles and the stock market recently reaching an all-time high, the globalists appear to be ready to wipe out the wealth of the middle class like they did in the Great Depression.
Any American with a knowledge of history will refuse to be disarmed as that quickly leads to democide.
An elementary school in Albuquerque, NM has a new policy to go along with the new school year. Just in case kids are gender confused, teachers are no longer allowed to address children as “boys and girls.”
After the Bathroom Hullabaloo of 2016, you would have thought that things might settle down and we could go about our business, peeing wherever we want to pee and that would be that.
But no.
No, now children as young as kindergarten age are being taught in classrooms in which teachers have been ordered to “eliminate gender.” According to a local report:
A letter was sent to teachers at Carlos Rey this month titled “Gender Identity Procedural Directive.” It tells teachers they can no longer refer to their students as boys and girls, and they are to eliminate gender in their classrooms.
Amazon is loaded with 16 pages of books for gender-confused children:
Of course, I don’t want to see anyone be cruel to children who are confused about their identity. But I also think this is a very alarming educational trend that is going to cause much more harm than good.
By the way, Albuquerque isn’t alone in teaching children about “gender fluidity.” Schools across the country are taking “you can be anything you want” to a whole new level.
It’s happening in Virginia
Fairfax County, Virginia is introducing a new curriculum that presents “the idea that there’s no such thing as 100 percent boys or 100 percent girls.” Here’s a breakdown of the ideology being presented, starting in middle school.
“Students will be provided definitions for sexual orientation terms heterosexuality, homosexuality and bisexuality; and the gender identity term transgender,” the district’s recommendations state. “Emphasis will be placed on recognizing that everyone is experiencing changes and the role of respectful, inclusive language in promoting an environment free of bias and discrimination.”
Eighth graders will be taught that individual identity “occurs over a lifetime and includes the component of sexual orientation and gender identity.”
“Individual identity will also be described as having four parts – biological gender, gender identity (includes transgender), gender role, and sexual orientation (includes heterosexual, bisexual, and homosexual).”
“Emphasis will be placed on an understanding that there is a broader, boundless, and fluid spectrum of sexuality that is developed throughout a lifetime,” the document states. “Sexual orientation and gender identity terms will be discussed with focus on appreciation for individual differences.”
“Understand there are many ways to express gender.”
First Grade
“Explain that there are many ways to express gender.”
Second Grade
“Understand there is a range of gender roles and expression,” and “Understand importance of treating others with respect regarding gender expression.”
Third Grade
“Explain that gender roles can vary considerably,” and “Understand importance of treating others with respect regarding gender identity.”
Fourth Grade
“Identify how friends and family can influence ideas regarding gender roles, identity, and expression,” and “Define sexual orientation.”
Fifth Grade
“Describe how media, society, and culture can influence ideas regarding gender roles, identity, and expression,” and “Identify trusted adults to ask questions about gender identity and sexual orientation.”
In the “Health Education Glossary,” “biological sex” is defined as:
“Based on chromosomes, hormones, and internal and external anatomy.”
While “gender” is defined as:
“A social construct based on emotional, behavioral, and cultural characteristics attached to a person’s biological sex.”
Further, gender is broken down into three subcategories:
Gender Expression: “The way someone outwardly expresses their gender.”
Gender Identity: “Someone’s inner sense of their gender.”
Gender Roles: “Social expectations about how people should act, think, or feel based on their assigned biological sex.”
What a festering crock of biologically-unsound baloney. If a kid isn’t “gender confused” before they start the class, they certainly will be by the time the miseducation system is done with them.
Heck, now it’s even a crime to use the wrong pronoun.
And just in case this isn’t confusing enough, one university has proclaimed it is illegal to use the wrong pronoun when referring to a transgender person. West Virginia University let 29,000 students know that “they are breaking federal law if they don’t agree to use the pronouns — including ‘he’ or ‘she,’ ‘zir’ or ‘hir’ etc. — preferred by each person.”
Criminal? It’s a federal crime now?????
You want to know why no one likes you?
THIS.
This is why no one likes you and why people are mean to you.
Well, for those of us who aren’t gender confused, no need to worry. WVU has issued a handy chart with brand spankin’ new gender-free pronouns so that you don’t commit that heinous pronoun crime.
It’s all politically correct baloney. Just be nice.
For the record, I don’t care where you pee, who you love, or if you want to be the opposite gender. That’s your business – not mine. You shouldn’t be mistreated for any of those things. But at the same time, you can’t force everyone to tiptoe around you, either, carefully assessing their pronoun usage and awkwardly worrying that they are being somehow offensive. If you don’t want people to treat YOU like a criminal, you shouldn’t want to make pronoun usage a criminal offense.
We’ve crossed over the fine line of being accepting into the territory of being idiotic. We’re giving the perpetually butthurt brand new reasons to take umbrage, and we’re making linguistic changes based on the wishes of 0.3% of the population.
And what’s worse is the fact that we are confusing children about all of this stuff. Why this biology-defying curriculum even needs to be taught is beyond me.
What if we just teach our kids not to be jerks toward kids who are different or who have different types of families, and leave it at that?
Jeremiah 50:37
A sword against her horses and against her chariots, and against all the foreign troops in her midst, that they may become as women! A sword against all her treasures, that they may be plundered!
Russia Builds 5000 Churches, adds 10,000 Clergy in Six Years
“There could not be such growth in the Church if there were no demand. That is why we feel so special when we place the foundations of new churches…”
The Orthodox faith, in concomitant partnership with the Russian State has constructed a hefty multitude of religious communities across the last six years, propelled by what is described as high demand. But could this be a sign of a flourishing Church, or maybe a protective measure against rising Islamic cultural-Marxism, as the floodgates of Europe are lifted?
With a rising percentage of Islamic adherents (6.5%) among the Russian populace, the need for the state to suppress the volatility of cultural Islam, as paralleled in the suffocating West, has never been of greater importance. The 41% of Russian Orthodoxy is under an emerging threat of decline as atheistic, liberal western culture leaks into the country, coupled with a gradually rising growth of conservative cultural Islam, poised to take the hot seat within decades.
The Polarization of the Cultures
The rampant proselytizing, high birth-rate, third world Islamic families spread Islam; a sociopolitical, religious ideology with extremist overtones at an incredible rate once comfortably established in the womb of a western state.
The very presence of the highly disciplinary cultural Islam will overwhelm the other faiths and cultures in the new country within mere decades, as the forced inter-generational principles of Islam are generally more stringently passed on in near-east, conservative Muslim families that are actually often very skeptical of marriage into western circles, not comparable to the (engineered to be) highly, highly liberal west. This cultural polarization has been engineered well and truly.
This multicultural approach, saying that we simply live side by side and live happily with each other has failed. Utterly failed. – Angela Merkel – while Merkel is not wrong in this instance, it is more a case of failure to integrate migrants than an implicit failure to live together, we haven’t taken steps to expect Muslims to integrate and start to assimilate, so we’ve got what we asked for.
These are families with high birth rates and a high tendency to form ethnic enclaves once deployed in a Western environment with other migrants, unable to speak the native language, by and large preventing any morsels of ‘outside’ influence for cultural acclimatization; it is a phenomenal recipe for regressive non-western Islam to become the dominant faith, culture and political system in western countries that knowingly allow all of this to occur, with mass migration exempt of sensibility for vetting the newcomers, and being more discerning of letting the floodgates open so easily.
Islamic migrants will vote for more welfare and ‘free stuff’ – so will blindly vote for the socialist West. They do not tend to care about liberties, western culture or constitutionalism due to their deprived backgrounds that had none of these things. Which makes sense, but understand that their inclination to their formative ways are being taken advantage of for political reasons.
1st generation Islamic migrants are being brought in (on a permanent basis more than not, in the UK housing is going up for them) without knowledge of their new surroundings, often without speaking the native language either. This forms ethnic enclaves and preserves non-integrated bubble communities that will grow rapidly (high birth rate)and take over urban centers, (white flight, natives have little in common culturally) and so on – because of these mono-ethnic communities that aren’t able to integrate adequately, a strong desire is formed in these growing, unchanged communities for Islamic traditions and customs, even schools and laws are sprouting up to emulate the third world countries they came from.
Islamic cultural Marxism in Europe and the West will estrange Russia and China as cultural outcasts, allowing for harsher foreign policies against them – as a predominantly third-world Islamic culture will allow this by popular, majority support using the ‘brilliant’ system of democracy we know as mob rule, and western liberals will concede more and more for the sake of not ‘offending’ and Muslims. I mean, just look at how extensive margins of current ‘western’ Muslims claim that their western countries should have the oppressive, highly Islamic Shariah law, many are not kind towards denominational, multifaceted societies, at all. Yet the liberals think it is racist to even bring this up as an issue, third-world migrants more than not, couldn’t care less about acceptance and lovey-dovey cooperation, they’re here to better their lives and keep their oppressive, pushy customs as well.
The high birth rate of the third and second worlds will spread their associated Islamic culture faster than western values will be able to be spread (and sustained) in the painfully low birth rate, 1st world west. It’s simple arithmetic that third world, cultural Islam will always override western culture based on these pretenses.
Observe the below statistics showing how third world migrants are far more entrenched in the anti-western lifestyle and mindset of cultural Islam, whereas those already in the West are much more moderate, but still not ideal. Does it make sense, therefore, to not import migrants to the west in such great quantities? Especially in the knowledge that they are from a background where a strong Islamic culture (that is not western in the slightest) is actively promoted, pluralism only works if everyone can respect common liberties and the notion of the individual, something utterly bereft in many oppressed third-world Muslim families.
It is easy to see that third world culture is far more extreme, and far more illiberal then western culture. Don’t get this twisted with ‘all cultures are equal’ – because they’re all different, some for the worse, some for the better.
Everyone is equal in soul, but in way of choice in spiritual and self-governmental matters; that is liable to differentiation, something that the ‘liberal’ west ignores.
These geopolitical effects are exactly what Putin has rooted out as detrimental, and contrary to his country’s values, Putin knows the elites in the West want these climatic outcomes, and are using a mass ‘migrant’ crisis to engineer their grand plan, a plan that will get rid of the liberty propagating Bible, and bring in the repressive control system promoted by the commandments in the Qu’ran.
This explains the recent moves to rapidly expand (and cement) the Orthodox faith in Russia, no doubt to sustain its dominance as the state religion, and the stern statements from Putin claiming cultural-Marxism, and intolerant cultures that seek to bend the established state culture to their template have no place in his country.
Putin knows that a majority Islam Europe and a majority Islam Russia will try to merge by popular demand – it will lead him into the clutches of the West and diminish his leadership, this is a prospect of severe civil unrest that Putin is not prepared to cede. He absolutely must hold onto Russian customs and ways, as China has similarly done by banning Islamic migrants.
You’ve probably seen the bloated mass of complaints in YouTube comments sections slating modern music as ‘worse’ than the old days; well, it turns out they may have a point. Music is noticeably losing its substance, melodically, lyrically and characteristically, along with a bunch of scientific terms I will impart below.
Pop culture degrades our overall culture, it is cultural engineering.
Pop culture is not actually pop culture, because it is controlled through and through, corporations and their labels choose who is ‘popular’ and who will never gain recognition. The music industry is brainwashing us into liking terrible songs; and as a result, liking a terrible message, and therefore embracing a terrible culture.
The music industry has taken a frightful turn for the worse as mainstream artists have lost touch with theirown spark for creativity; creativity has sold out. Big names are bought and sold, algorithm driven, and ghost writers are rampant in the highest echelons; anyone that scrapes an honest morsel of popularity is rapidly bought off. This is a ‘pop culture’ totally dominated by corporate interest, and a grotesque hunger for moneymaking. Meaningful influence in music is suppressed and siphoned, the messages are always controlled and people will always listen to it because it is so accessible, and so widely disseminated.
Hopsin, a famous rapper who rose to fame in his feud with a label, he branched away and made his own label and has gained significant popularity.
Stephen Patrick Morrissey, ex Smiths frontman and solo artist has not landed a record deal for years, yet his music holds a meaningful message, is crafted to a phenomenal standard and has a healthy degree of variety. In the below quote he shares his view of pop music, and why you need to avoid it.
Morrissey (Singer, songwriter): I think the pop chart today is entirely market-driven. And it has nothing to do with public taste. And it has nothing to do with moving music forward. It’s simply a market chart. And people who’ve managed to grapple into the top five have done so because of an aggressive campaign, and nothing else. And so many sales are mysteriously automatic. Very often now we glance an eye at the chart and we can’t understand why a certain person is No1 or No2, why have they flown in at No3. It’s understandable to ask that question. But it’s simply market-driven. Nothing else. The quality of the music, the content – absolutely immaterial. As a direct result so many bands and so many artists have ongoing success with absolutely no songs.
Burn down the disco Hang the blessed DJ Because the music that they constantly play It says nothing to me about my life – Panic, the Smiths
Russell Brand on Katy Perry: ‘Vapid, vacuous and plastic’: labels ex-wife Katy Perry’s lifestyle the ‘very thing I detest’
Shia LaBeouf: In my parents’ generation, rebellion was pop culture. It’s not anymore.
Trevor Dunn: Pop culture is not about depth. It’s about marketing, supply and demand, consumerism.
Science says music is getting worse: homogeneity
Scientific studies have even highlighted that the vocabulary and variety of the collective music culture has taken a nosedive, subject material has veered towards an overtly materialistic and sexual stature, while any melodic variety has become an incomprehensible mush of sameness. Our musical diversity has become inbred, mainly headlined by pretentious artists that have largely inaccessible content, and sport a message that holds little to no substance in most cases – a product of the example set by pop music that has been branded and promoted as ‘popular’ but is really a facet in a game of big-money marketing and exposure.
Loudness comes at the expense of dynamic range—in very broad terms, when the whole song is loud, nothing within it stands out as being exclamatory or punchy. (This two-minute YouTube video does a great job of demonstrating how excessive loudness saps richness and depth from a recording.) Indeed, Serrà and his colleagues found that the loudness of recorded music is increasing by about one decibel every eight years.
So, what happened since 1955? Well, timbral variety went down. That means that songs are becoming more and more homogeneous. In other words, all pop music sounds the same now.
A catchy beat is the staple hook for most popular music, lyrics are engineered to be vague but ‘nice’ sounding, so not intellectually stimulating whatsoever. The result is a stupor of ‘cool beats’ that keep you on a high of raves and party lifestyle antics, while intellectualism is centralized to the elites behind the scenes, you are the stooge that learned to love the taste of the musical equivalent of faeces, because it was overwhelmingly branded ‘cool’ to do so.
“If you tell a big enough lie and tell it frequently enough, it will be believed.”
― Adolf Hitler
Algorithms find the most profitable sound
Algorithm technology has exploded in recent years, along with this advancement has come the lucrative opportunity for discovering the most profitable melodies, tempos and a host of other musical attributes connected to popular artists.
Pop music automation is a field of study among musicians and computer scientists with a goal of producing successful pop music algorithmically. It is often based on the premise that pop music is especially formulaic, unchanging, and easy to compose.
What this means is that popular music is becoming homogenized (more samey) for the very sake of assuring profits for the organisations behind the big names. The patterns of music that receive the most hits are replicated by big names that are bought in a war of supply and demand; to make the most money is the objective, not the upholstery of individuality in music, the fundamental basis of art is dismissed.
People arguing against the notion that music is worsening will claim that artists are making their own choices in the collective trajectory of music trends, and that somehow this excuses the growing blandness of our music.
If you landed from another planet and wanted to make it big there, it would make sense you’d go for very generic and very loud and put an attractive person as your celebrity.
With the mass-exposed rise of monetized, corporate pop music, the influential trickle-down effect on artists at every level is unimaginable, the sheer numerical pull-factor of modern pop music’s popularity overshadowing anything in the 20th century by a considerable amount is enough to poison new musicianship at the entry level, and might be a reason new music is seeming so similarly unpalatable; people flock to what is perceived to be popular.
Black Lives Matter, a Soros funded psy-op designed to generate civil unrest, and to foment an atmosphere ripe for the gradual imposition of repackaged martial law, better called the police state, which is suggesting in part, by the militarization of police becoming more widespread. The recent staged killings of cops will only accentuate the ‘necessity’ to continue this – the Hegelian dialectic is back, people.
For those unaware, Black Lives Matter (BLM) is an inherently racist movement of segregationist proportions. Yes, there is corruption in the ranks of the police, as there is in every organisation involving human beings, but this gives no excuse to be disruptive, to kill police (in some cases) and advocate physical revolt (in some cases), and to cry out for special treatment because of your skin color.
The Washington Post even had the audacity to assimilate the civil rights movement with violence, when a larger portion of the demonstrations were guided by non-violent principles, does Martin Luther King Jr. come to mind whatsoever?
Anyway, here’s the headline:
Don’t criticize Black Lives Matter for provoking violence. The civil rights movement did, too.
This attempted legitimization of the BLM movement headlined by the Washington Post bears the composition/division & tu quoque logical fallacies as defined by:
Composition/division: you assumed that one part of something has to be applied to all, or other, parts of it; or that the whole must apply to its parts. In WP’s case, claiming that certain violent or provocative aspects of the original civil rights movement, i.e. Black Panthers, can authenticate the BLM movement.
Tu Quoque: you avoided having to engage with criticism by turning it back on the accuser – you answered criticism with criticism. In the WP’s case,pointing out one less admirable part of the civil rights movement to avoid debate concerning the equally shameful behavior of another.
Mike Huckabee said the civil rights leader (MLK) would be “appalled” by BLM’s strategy: To address racial injustice, “you don’t do it by magnifying the problems,” he said.
Another pressing point can be inferred from lack of emphasis given to the shocking rates of Black-on-Black crime. According to FBI data, 4,906 black people killed other blacks in 2010 and 2011. That is more than the total number of U.S. military deaths in Iraq over the last decade. More black Americans killed other blacks in two years than were lynched from 1882 to 1968, according to the Tuskegee Institute.
Prominent rapper and record producer Hopsin told the truth about ‘Black Lives Matter’ in a barrage of tweets that he was subsequently forced to delete, remarking that BLM activists can’t claim to care about black lives until they address the elephant in the room – black people killing each other in huge numbers.
Black lives don’t matter to a lot of blacks. So how come all of a sudden black lives matter when someone else kills us?
The message behind Hopsin’s tweet really unveils the widespread, heavily dysfunctional, ghettoized communities of blacks that run on a gross dependency towards criminal activity to stay afloat in a culture known as ‘hustling’ as a result of the un-vetted impoverishment of many black families that have a society of thugs, where contraception is lacking and black abortions are higher than black births.
This links into how proportionally, blacks are on average more criminal than their white counterparts, but I wouldn’t pin this criminality entirely to blacks, but to their often sorely deprived circumstances, and the exacerbating effects of a police-hating ‘gangster’ culture still shamelessly promulgated, and purveyed as ‘cool’ by mainstream media platforms, while racism does come into it partially, it is a relatively small issue that is not helped by the overwhelming image of blacks as barbarian thugs, an image that rings true in many cases, the 2015 ‘gangster’ movie, ‘Straight Outta Compton’ is a prime example of how the MSM are legitimizing and instilling criminal behavior as something to aspire to, the police killings and long-held gang-cop rivalries are being used by Soros as a societal weak-spot to blow out of proportion to trigger disruption and bring in greater federalization, this whole orchestration seems to be a malicious product of an elite think tank.
‘Straight Outta Compton’ and ‘GTA V’ romanticize the ‘ghetto’ life as the norm, they encourage dependency on material things, they advocate gang-based criminality and aggression over civility: they are ultimately divisive, as the propagandists intended – none of these lifestyles are intellectually beneficial, these lifestyles demonstrate distrust between people, not unification – yet Black Lives Matter can’t seem to see this fault, a fault present throughout the majority of the black community, as reflected in crime statistics.
Grand Theft Auto 5, the most expensive videogame of all time, another good example of how gangster-crime culture is being promoted in some ways via the media.
This idea of mistreatment can be re-evaluated with how Michael Brown, Eric Garner, and Freddie Gray are not martyrs, and cannot be used to brand all cops as oppressive, especially when statistics show Blacks to be disproportionately more violent than other ethnicities.
On the day he died, Michael Brown was a burglary suspect. After a fistfight and a failed attempt to disarm Officer Darren Wilson, Michael Brown was shot dead before he could continue his attack. That he had his “hands up” in surrender is a pernicious lie.
Had Michael Brown not resisted arrest and simply complied with Officer Wilson, he’d still be alive today.
Repeat offender Freddie Gray was suspected of selling hard drugs when he was apprehended by Baltimore police. Gray died from a severe spinal cord injury while in police custody. He had a penchant for running from the police and a “history,” according to the Baltimore Sun, “of participating in ‘crash-for-cash’ schemes—injuring himself in law enforcement settings to collect settlements.”
Eric Garner was committing the “crime” of selling un-taxed cigarettes when he was apprehended by a half-dozen cops. Garner died after being placed in a chokehold by an arresting officer.
Ultimately, a Staten Island grand jury concluded that there wasn’t enough evidence to bring a criminal indictment against the NYPD officer who killed Eric Garner. Reasonable people can debate whether or not the officer’s actions were excessive; however, it’s also worth noting that the medical examiner’s report said that Garner’s bad health, including obesity, contributed to his death.
Even Eric Garner’s daughter “doubts” that her father’s death was motivated by race. Garner’s mother said she would “agree.”
Anecdotal (logical fallacy)
Using personal experience or an isolated example instead of a valid argument, especially to dismiss statistics.
The BLM movement has largely gone off of snippets of film clips likely taken out of context, in a few isolated events to justify the narrative that black people are somehow being oppressed, the Eric Garner death is a big campaign citation of the BLM movement. Yet while the arrest seemed harsh at the time; the statistical evidence suggests that crime among blacks is disproportionately rampant, therefore claiming that there is an ‘anti-black’ sentiment among police would be misleading, Garner’s defiance and large stature coupled with the stigma of black criminality likely motivated the choke hold. Garner’s death is certainly controversial, but an isolated case which doesn’t ever warrant anti-police rhetoric.
Around 93% of all black murders are committed by other blacks according to the U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics, despite the fact that blacks only make up around 13% of the population.
Yes, peacefully campaign if you think that racially motivated killings are taking place, despite no evidence whatsoever to assuredly back this – except the ‘martyrs’ that are cited by the BLM movement, which have been debunked.
Why don’t all lives matter? According to one leading BLM campaigner, saying that “all lives matter” is a racial slur. Why emphasize the police when there are so many other points of ‘oppression’ to counter. Maybe it is because the Soros organisation wants to provoke the police and legitimize heightened federalization?
Because if all lives mattered, there wouldn’t be a violent movement that advocated provocative behavior, if all lives mattered BLM would attempt to build bridges in light of MLK’s principle of love and non-aggression, not burn bridges. If all lives mattered, BLM wouldn’t be segregationist and discriminate whites in some cases.
It seems that the BLM is another wave of white-guilt programming that is prepping us into just accepting every minority regardless of their cultural defects; in the case of Blacks it is largely the ‘gangster’ crime-driven culture that is being ignored, in the case of near-eastern Muslims it is generally a culture of gender oppression and western intolerance that we seem to forget – both of these cultural disadvantages are being ignored, and the issues are being attributed instead to the color of a person’s skin as a matter of race, which achieves very little in dealing with the real problems behind the colors.
Black Lives Matter is a backwards movement of manufacturing ‘victimized’ black people, and painting cops as the ‘bad-cop’ oppressors. It is fundamentally divisive and purposefully approaches black ‘oppression’ via very few, irrational angles.
It is this antisocial culture that is being used as a trigger-point to reignite conflict between the police and the pushed ‘underdog’ identity in the minority black community; the fact that I’m saying ‘black community’ shows how black ‘gangster’ culture has criminalized some blacks, and estranged them from mainstream society, this has backfired and come to a manifested head in the BLM movement.
The government & media need to be challenged for criminalizing, impoverishing & alienating blacks, not the police that have to clean up the mess and deal with gangster infested ‘no-go’ zones; no wonder the black community has been so negatively stigmatized, their media-manufactured culture practically glorifies violence.
Man, why do black people gotta be the only ones who can’t evolve. ‘Cause you in the streets acting like Neanderthals – Hopsin, Rapper, Ill Mind 5
By externalizing the blame to the police for doing their jobs in suppressing crime, and not realizing that it is the government that needs to do more to introduce the insular black culture to the stable, middle class limelight & eliminate ‘gangster’ culture; we have a paradox fueled by emotional angst, and not rational solutions. Ghettoized blacks and the crime they generate to make ends meet are results of inequalities that need to be addressed by the government, not by blaming the cops for duly dealing with these catalysts for criminal activity.
BLM will militarize the Police
BLM is the perfectly divisive psy-op to militarize the cops and create federalized police states governed by fear and division, a ‘race war’ of sorts will markedly divide and conquer the masses into accepting heightened federal control. Because the largely financially comfortable whites won’t ever riot – the elites will target the disadvantaged ghetto/gangster communities that have a bone to pick with the cops for often lawfully killing their compatriots in self-defense and in struggles to apprehend members of a maladjusted community forced and cajoled into crime as the norm.
If you can federalize all of the states’ police departments, you can engineer a safeguarded collapse, one without completely losing control, and set the stage for bringing order out of chaos; federalized, militarized police that have an expectation to treat people as hostile will be much more likely to follow a federal agenda, and not work in the best interests of protecting the people, they will no longer see people as civil and orderly – people will be dehumanized.
Executive Order – United States Policy on Pre- and Post-Strike Measures to Address Civilian Casualties in U.S. Operations Involving the Use of Force.
Obama has even passed an executive order regarding pre and post strike civilian casualties – link – what does the white house know that we do not? And why has this executive order been passed in the midst of a period of unrest surrounding BLM? Is there significant civil conflict anticipated?
The truth is that the overwhelmingly white elites want riots, BLM is funded by them and for them, it favors divide and conquer, and feeds from the ugly impulsion of anger.
The elites hope to harness the violence of ghetto black culture and collide this with the police as their ‘oppressors’ versus the underdogs.
This is the ‘black and white’ logical fallacy pushed by Black Lives Matter, where the police get the blame for racial discrimination as the cause of blacks being the social underdogs, whereas in reality it is a combination of black’s behavior by choice or by circumstance, and the US government not doing enough to shut down this crime inclined behavior, and the deprived circumstance at the grass roots, in many cases the government even supports it.
Where two alternative states are presented as the only possibilities, when in fact more possibilities exist.
These ‘other possibilities’ being that the US government hasn’t done enough to tackle ghettoized neighborhoods, no-go zones, to educate blacks in civil behavior, to discourage gangster culture in the media, and on the streets. Maybe then the police won’t be forced to treat ghetto neighborhoods in such a hard-handed demeanor. The BLM movement should be marching at the white house, not blindly striking out at one branch of the tree.
‘Be faithful to your roots’ is the liberal version of ‘Stay in your ghetto.’
BLM doesn’t aim to change the roots of black culture, only strike out and blame those who have to deal with its flaws.
In fact, cops have not been called to stabilize various provocative demonstrations of the Black Lives Matter movement. This movement is a movement of hate that is being intentionally allowed to grow; one that ignores the faults of black culture, and ascertains that fighting law enforcement will somehow create amicable unification, solve all the problems of police brutality, and render blacks in a positive light, none of which it will ever solve.
If the Negro in the ghetto must eternally be fed by the hand that pushes him into the ghetto, he will never become strong enough to get out of the ghetto. Carter G. Woodson
BLM doesn’t want to stop the ghetto, it wants to attack the cops that deal with the ghetto and then complain when these cops act with extreme caution, a paradox ensues; BLM simply has no investment in challenging the real oppressors; government that benefits from black dependency on them, and the degradation of the middle class, and the principle of divide and conquer.
Ghettos in Nazi-occupied Europe. Beginning with the invasion of Poland during World War II, the regime of Nazi Germany set up ghettos across occupied Europe in order to segregate and confine Jews, and sometimes Gypsies, into small sections of towns and cities furthering their exploitation (and limiting their capacity to be free).
The ghetto is about survival and little else, this means questioning an authority figure beyond the police becomes unlikely, the powers that be would love for it to remain that way.
What is really needed is an overhaul of the black image; because when it is statistically proven that blacks are more prone to committing crime, a movement for blacks against the police is not going to help dismantle the crime stigma that is still attached to the black community, it will only ever worsen it.
Mainstream Media champions ‘Black’ culture as synonymous with hood culture.
The more mainstream media celebrates ‘black’ ghetto culture, the more people will see it as populist to ignore its flaws, and defend it as acceptable. ‘Black Lives Matter’ is the end product of this romanticizing brainwashing for hood culture roots as something to be proud of.
Beyoncé is seen at Superbowl 50 promoting ‘black’ nationalism, the idea that blacks are somehow socially exclusive, and oppressed by the police and whites, the ideology of ‘Black Lives Matter’ resonates strongly with the ‘black pride’ sentiment disseminated by the media.
The expression ‘Us and them’ comes to mind, Beyoncé is an establishment pawn used to foment a black supremacist mindset that engages blind pride, and dismisses the ‘elephant in the room’ flaws of black ghetto culture and its criminal abundance.
The performance was a political statement, and a throwback to times when racism was predominant, but racism is not nearly as widespread now as it was in the 60s. Therefore, funding this kind of message only intends to guilt-silence whites concerned over the surge of radicalized black pride, and enable liberals to inanely consider this ‘black pride’ sentiment ‘justice’ for the actions of white people’s predecessors; this has gotten out of control and BLM is its culmination.
What could have been simply a harmless celebration of culture, has been hijacked by the elites, and turned into something that divides us. The elites, such as George Soros, have packaged a divisive movement as a liberal one, and used the racist card to stop anyone who questions it.
Beyoncé, Black Panthers themed Superbowl 50 performance.
Next year will mark the twentieth anniversary of Diana Princess of Wales’ unfortunate assassination at the Pont d’Alma underpass in Paris, the thirteenth pillar of that underpass being the collision point in a fatal car crash that would tragically take three lives, and severely threaten another.
This year marks twenty years since a divorce that would brand Diana a focal point of the royal household’s upheaval, an infamously loose cannon of the establishment that held values in direct contravention to the murky aspirations devised behind the gold plated gateways and marble lined palatial estates.
The Queen of Hearts
Diana’s track record in royalty was somewhat of a rocky road, her relationship, marriage and divorce with Prince Charles coupled with her outspoken critique of ‘the establishment’ she’d been born into, proved her daring, realistic audacity was of no shortage. Being privy to sensitive, esoteric information, the entrusted stature of Diana’s ‘role’ as a Royal was expectantly tough, her very life rested on this ‘role’ and the faithful upholding of its secrets and image.
Which leads me on to say how the dandy image of the royal establishment can be disassembled in light of the Diana and Charles relationship, as a family of showy colours, pearly whites and paparazzi magnets that have painted established authority in the mindless conception of television personalities emblazoned on a facade of deceptive, theatrical grandeur – Diana offered us reality, she showed up the Royals for what they were, two-faced actors that put it on for glitzy smiles and virtuous gestures, while simultaneously concealing the ugly underbelly of the whole ruse.
See the following full interview for an in-depth insight into Diana’s thought process going into (and out of) marital royalty, and her difficulties managing the internal & external tensions and ramifications of holding royal reputation, that she expressively claims to be ‘isolating’ and disingenuous to the individual – she admits that she was given a ‘role’ as a puppet.
Diana mingled in occult circles throughout her royal career, in the above picture you can see her alongside CFR/Bilderberg front man Henry Kissinger. The Royal family, as one of the 13 bloodlines (Windsor) has always held strong ties to Illuminati circles. Diana’s induction into this treacherous world must have come with certain revelations and oaths that prompted her conscience, i.e. knowledge of the terrors of the New World Order – fortunately every man/woman comes with a free spirit, it is choice that defines our spiritual allegiance – Diana chose truth, but her attachments and affiliations with evil claimed her life when she tried to escape it by divorce and remarriage, an amicable way to separate.
The Motive to Kill Diana
Diana was killed because she was almost certainly pregnant with Dodi’s child, and the British Royal Family didn’t want an Arab in their ‘sacred’ bloodline. Diana was also becoming politically involved in the Middle East and the elite saw her as a loose cannon that could rally popular support around anything, the same applied to JFK, John Lennon, Bob Marley etc. Diana herself remarked to reporters that there would be ‘a big surprise’ from her a few days before her death. It would be seen as a sham against the establishment for an unplanned marriage to go ahead, or for an incriminating exposé from someone in their own ranks with the publicity Diana had, and of course, the risk for Diana to impart the secrets of House Windsor to the Al-Fayed’s who had significant financial and social leverage for protecting Diana, so she had to die before she could cause any long-lasting damages.
And he (Mohamed Al-Fayed ) is convinced that some of the paparazzi, including the driver of the white Fiat Uno, were MI6 agents whose mission was to stop the announcement of the couple’s engagement – and Diana’s pregnancy.
Her contact with the dark inner-circles of secretive organisations linked to the Windsors, coupled with her ‘free-spirited’ refusal to obey orders and conventions made her a huge threat to revealing the twisted plans and purposes of these people, plans she knew were intended to harm, not help, the common man.
Body Language, when watching take body language into consideration, because Diana – wittingly or unwittingly gives a lot away with her eye, face and head movements.
Many psychologists believe that when a person looks up to their right they are likely to be telling a lie. Glancing up to the left, on the other hand, is said to indicate honesty.
Looking down and to the left can indicate that they are talking to themselves (look for slight movement of the lips). Looking down and to the right can indicate that they are attending to internal emotions.
Looking down can be a signal of submission. It can also indicate that the person is feeling guilty, in Diana’s case for not revealing all there is to reveal.
High relevancy Time stamps
28:57 and onwards
and 33:08 onwards
Interviewer: “Do you really believe that a campaign was being waged against you?”
Diana: “Yes, I did, absolutely yeah.”
Interviewer: “Why?”
Diana: “I was the separated wife of the Prince of Wales, I was a problem, full stop, never happened before, what do we do with her?”
Interviewer: “Can’t we back her off quietly instead of campaign against her?”
Diana: “She won’t go quietly, that’s the problem. I’ll fight ’till the end, as I believe that I have a role to fulfill (Not their role?), and I’ve got two children to bring up (putting your ‘disapproved’ ideas into their heads?).”
…
35:11
Diana: “I always got more publicity, uhh (thinking of a filtered way to express), my work was discussed much more than him (So Charles had something to conceal/hide?), and you know, from that point of view I understand it, but I was doing good things (And Charles/affiliates were not?), and I wanted to do good things, I was never going to hurt anyone. Was never going to let anyone down (Again, does that set you apart from the intentions of the royal circle? Apparently so).”
“but I was doing good things, and I wanted to do good things, I was never going to hurt anyone. Was never going to let anyone down.”
…
Diana: “But, I am a free spirit, unfortunately for some.” (looks down, laughs)
Diana: “I think that the British people need someone in public life to give affection, to make them feel important, to support them, to give them light in their dark tunnels.”
They see me as a threat of some kind. And I’m here to do good, I’m not a destructive person.
Interviewer: “Why do they see you as a threat?”
Diana: (Hesitant) “I think every strong woman in history has had to walk down a similar path, and I think it’s the strength that causes the confusion and the fear. Why is she strong, where does she get it from, where is she taking it, where is she going to use it, why do the public still support her?”
Diana: “When I say public, you go into an engagement, and there’s a great many people there.” (She rallies people’s support)
Interviewer: “Do you think the Prince of Wales will ever be King?”
Diana: “Uhm, I don’t think any of us know the answer to that. And obviously it’s a question that’s in everybody’s head. But who knows, who knows what fate will produce, who knows what circumstances will provoke?”
Interviewer: “But you would know him better than most people?”
Diana: “Hm”
Interviewer: “Do you think he would wish to be King?”
Diana: “There was always conflict on that subject, with him – when we discussed it. And I understood that conflict, because it’s a very demanding role, being Prince of Wales – but it is an equally more demanding role being King. And being Prince of Wales produces more freedom now, and being King would be a little bit more suffocating.
Diana: “…And because I know the character, I would think that the ‘top job’ as I call it, would bring enormous limitations to him, and I don’t know whether he could adapt to that.” (Saying Charles is not fit to be King, based on character that is hidden from public eye)
The (Basic) Timeline of Events
Diana’s murder/assassination took place in the early hours of the 31st of August 1997 in Paris, France. Here is the basic timeline sourced from the BBC.
30th August (Day prior)
1300 hours: (Diana and Dodi) board a private jet at Olbia airport, Sardinia, to take them to Paris. Where they plan to stay 1 night, Diana plans to return to London the next morning.
1520: Mr Al Fayed and the princess arrive at Le Bourget airfield, Paris, and are met by Henri Paul, deputy head of security at the Ritz Hotel. French paparazzi, tipped off by their Sardinian colleagues, also await the couple. Mr Al Fayed is stressed by their presence and tells their driver to lose them.
1635: The couple enter the Ritz.
1800: Mr Al Fayed, accompanied by bodyguards, picks up a ring he has ordered from Repossi’s jewellers just outside the Ritz.
1900: The princess and Mr Al Fayed go back to his apartment just off the Champs Elysées. They take the back exit to escape the paparazzi.
1905: Mr Paul leaves the Ritz, telling his colleagues to call him if the couple return to the hotel.
2130: Mr Al Fayed’s plans to take the princess for a romantic dinner are ruined as the couple are followed by paparazzi. Mr Al Fayed decides they should return to the Ritz. They are followed by some 30 photographers.
2155: Security at the Ritz call Mr Paul and tell him the couple have returned.
2200: The couple enter the hotel restaurant to dine, but leave after 10 minutes. Princess Diana is reportedly visibly upset over the stress of the day. The couple dine in the Imperial Suite instead.
2201: Mr Paul arrives back at the Ritz in his Austin Cooper. He then joins bodyguards Kez Wingfield and Trever Rees-Jones in the Vendome bar at the Ritz. The three make small talk whilst they wait for Princess Diana and Mr Al Fayed to finish their meal in the Imperial Suite.
2300: Mr Paul is seen speaking to paparazzi outside the hotel. Telling the press that the couple will soon depart.
2337: Mr Paul speaks with Mr Al Fayed and Princess Diana in the Imperial Suite. The couple are going to return to Mr Al Fayed’s apartment off of the Champs Elysées. Mr Paul exits and tells bodyguards Mr Wingfield and Mr Rees-Jones that a decoy plan has been hatched to escape the paparazzi. The two cars the couple had been using that day, a Mercedes and a Range Rover, are to leave from the front of the hotel with the bodyguards. Princess Diana and Mr Al Fayed will leave from the back in an unmarked car, driven by Mr Paul. Mr Wingfield and Mr Rees-Jones express concern that under this plan there is no protection for the couple. Mr Al Fayed agrees to allow one bodyguard to travel with him and the Princess.
31 August, 1997
0019: Mr Paul and the couple chat as they wait for their car to be driven to the rear of the Ritz.
0020: The car now ready, Mr Rees-Jones escorts Princess Diana to the waiting Mercedes. She sits on the rear passenger side. Mr Al Fayed joins her on the rear driver’s side. Paparazzi take photos of the couple as they enter the car. They depart abruptly, heading toward Place de la Concorde.
The 1997 crash killed Diana, Dodi and their driver
0025: The Mercedes crashes into the 13th pillar of the Alma tunnel, killing Mr Paul and Mr Al Fayed. Mr Rees-Jones and the princess are seriously injured. Photographer Romuald Rat arrives within seconds – he is the first on the scene.
0026: First call to the authorities. Emergency doctor Frédéric Mailliez is driving by when he sees the crashed Mercedes. He is the first doctor on the scene and calls for help.
0028 – 0030: First two police officers arrive. They have difficulty cordoning off the accident from gathering paparazzi.
0032: Fire engine and ambulance arrive. Eight paparazzi are arrested at the accident scene and taken in for questioning.
0125: After nearly an hour, Princess Diana’s ambulance leaves for hospital. She has already suffered a cardiac arrest.
0130: Mr Al Fayed is pronounced dead.
0155: Princess Diana’s ambulance stops for five minutes to inject adrenaline into her body.
0206: The ambulance arrives at Pitié-Salpétrière Hospital. Doctors note that she has torn her pulmonary vein, a rare condition that begs little chance of survival. She receives open heart massage for nearly two hours.
0400: Princess Diana is declared dead.
0800: Mr Paul’s autopsy begins at l’Institut Médico-Légal, carried out by Professor Dominique Lecomte.
Hidden Evidence
1. The on-board computer chip.
The car Diana was in at the time of the crash – a black Mercedes S280 – was the only available car that night.
The car had previously been stolen, and only recently found by the rental company, who owned the car.
When it was recovered, the only thing missing from the car was an on-board computer chip; this chip controlled the cars navigation, acceleration, steering, and braking – it is likely that the car was sabotaged, and the original computer chip had been replaced with a tampered one, this allowed remote control of the car’s maneuverability.
2. Diana’s belt was not working properly.
Post-analysis of the vehicle proved that Diana’s belt was not in good condition, all the other belts were in good condition, is this indicative of tampering? Obviously the crash might have caused damages, but considering the front belts were still intact, where the brunt of the crash occurred – yet the rear seat with Diana’s belt was broken, any suspicions are valid – by observed patterns of courtesy, Dodi would usually allow Diana into the vehicle first, this made tampering with Diana’s belt at the rear right seat an easy choice for her covert adversaries.
3. The Alma Tunnel was sterilized the next day, and also re-opened to the public within 5 hours of the crash, any potential forensic analysis of the scene was therefore rendered useless.
Potential blood spillages were wiped clean, tire skids giving crucial insights into how the car moved etc, were wiped away. No legible investigation would allow this to happen, ever.
All sensitive forensic materials would have been trampled by traffic first, and than sterilized/swept away in the dubious clean up that occurred within days of the crash.
4. Diana even stated that a car crash plan was imminent.
In one ominous, private letter, Diana hauntingly stated, “My husband is planning ‘an accident’ in my car, brake failure and serious head injury in order to make the path clear for Charles to marry.”
5. Secret Service were at the scene fastest.
The Pont de L’Alma tunnel was crawling with secret service personnel from French and British intelligence. The driver of the Mercedes, Henri Paul is now confirmed as having worked for the French secret service.
It is likely that Diana’s ‘chauffeur’ Henri Paul had orders from people other than Dodi Al-Fayed, orders to move away from Dodi’s flat and take an odd, isolated, and unscheduled route (professional chauffeurs always schedule routes, in this case the bustling avenue road of the Champs-Élysées was the scheduled route) but instead Henri Paul went into a dark tunnel where a staged crash was easy, with minimal eye-witnesses. The fact a backup vehicle, which was standard protocol, was not present, also suggests the whole event was engineered.
6. Other damning points
Just before the car entered the tunnel every security camera in the tunnel mysteriously died, preventing us from ever seeing footage of what caused the crash. There was strangely no CCTV accessed along the route of the Mercedes whatsoever; meaning somebody flipped the switch.
Eyewitnesses reported snipers and gunfire within the tunnel. (I don’t believe this is probable, however it might have occurred to rupture frontal tires, but possible bullet residue still makes me believe this idea is less probable than others – bullets are just too risky, and could easily give everything away.)
The crime scene was completely cleaned within hours of the crash, a policy totally anathema to standard preservation of any crime scene. Tire marks/blood and whatever physical indications of the causes of the crash were removed.
Diana was still alive after the crash. But unexplained delays in getting her to the hospital, caused by the unnecessarily slow speed of the ambulance and the fact that it passed several nearer hospitals before reaching its destination, ensured Diana was dead/guaranteed to die upon arrival. A faster response could have saved her life. The blood pressure argument is flawed, as various paramedics have come forward to say that a slowdown is not required.
The Mercedes used to transport Dodi and Diana from the Ritz was mysteriously swapped for a car that had been stolen only weeks earlier (this ties into the electronic chip replacement that I’ve explained above.)
Multiple eyewitnesses reported a mysterious flash of light immediately before the crash. Many insist that this was a laser directed at the driver to cause temporary blindness leading to the crash.
7. The ‘Mysterious’ Fiat Uno
A white fiat uno did clip the rear right end of the Mercedes that Diana was in, inside the tunnel, this key factor has been largely suppressed by the authorities with the story that ex-special services ‘chauffeur’ Henri Paul was drink driving, disproved by CCTV footage at the Ritz showing him to bend down to tie his laces comfortably with good balance.
The car was ‘incidentally’ repainted shortly after the Alma tunnel crash, and was sold by owner, James Andanson in October 1997.
James Andanson was notoriously egotistical, allegedly bragging to friends in 2000 of his involvement in the Diana crash, claiming he was present at the scene, and had ‘explosive’ photos that he was planning to release.
James Andanson who is alleged to have been driving the Fiat Uno that night was found dead in 2000, shot in the head, his corpse left in a burnt out car. His body, found in thick woodland near Montpellier, was so badly charred that it took police nearly a month before DNA and dental records confirmed his identity. It was ruled as a suicide, even though suicide by self-immolation is greatly uncommon; a simple gunshot would have sufficed.
A matter of weeks after Andanson’s death, masked men raided the SIPA photography firm, the company that Andanson had been employed with, it is logical to assume this was to destroy the last strings of Andanson’s photographed evidence that may prove an assassination took place.
The fireman who discovered the body (of Andanson), Christophe Pelat, has said: “I saw him at close range and I’m absolutely convinced that he had been shot in the head, twice.”
Notice the wheel angled outwards, the fiat pushed the car into the pillars, in the frenzy of the moment Henri Paul tried to steer back out.
8. The odd behavior of the French Police
The initial French investigation into the crash went to every length to ignore key evidence, intimidate eyewitnesses into silence and outright fabricate evidence.
9. A Bright Light
While less convincing than other speculative inquests, the bright light claims are nonetheless relevant in the disorientation of the driver, and give another explanation for the crash.
10. Mercedes refused to inspect the wreckage.
Many believe this refusal to commit a Mercedes employed professional to inspect the wreckage is insinuative of how easily it would be to find evidence of tampering with the vehicle.
Whatever the reason for this denial of investigative service, the reality is that this is a very, very odd incident among many others.
How it all happened.
James Andanson, or whoever drove the Fiat Uno resembling Andanson’s car, described as a ‘Mediterranean man’ with ‘wiry hair’ by one witness, likely purposefully rammed the right side of the bumper at the front of the Mercedes at speeds around 65 mph, this would have instantly caused a crash that killed Diana as at such speeds, any viable opportunity for realigning the car by steering would be unlikely, we do know that Henri Paul did attempt to regain control by steering full lock right, as shown in the wreckage with a right turned wheel, we can see he partially did so too, the indentation where the car struck the pillar is offset slightly left from the center of the front of the vehicle, explaining how Henri Paul died so quickly being the driver on the left side; the shock waves would have been distributed to the left side due to the last ditch attempt to turn the car away from the pillar, explaining why both Henri Paul and Dodi Fayed died instantly, and Diana and Trevor Reese did not suffer as severe injuries (Diana would have lived if she was transported to hospital faster, she did not die immediately) and Trevor Reese survived.
One said that paint scratches from the Fiat, found on the side-view mirror and bumper of the Mercedes, were identical to samples from the matching spot on Andanson’s Fiat.
I believe that the controller/device that was replaced in the tampered Mercedes was used to temporarily de-activate Henri Paul’s brakes and mess with the traction system, preventing him from averting the crash by using the brake pedal and also to steer Henri Paul’s car completely leftwards into the pillar to create the head on collision by making the wheel slack and unresponsive due to the tampering, as a mere shunt against an experienced chauffeur would not be enough to create a head on crash of this severity against Henri Paul, a professional driver – thus, another factor was inexplicably at play.
I also believe that Andanson’s car was taken and used as a way of covering the tracks of the perpetrator(s), who could blend into the Paparazzi crowd in the Fiat as they followed Diana around that day. This gave time and foresight for the logistical demands of killing Diana, while not looking suspicious in another more suspect vehicle, or suspicious following Diana in an isolated manner – Andanson was a well known Paparazzi member; but he also had MI6 connections and was known to be around certain individuals before the times of their deaths, and to take the last photos of certain people – making him very wealthy, his role in the crowd of the Paparazzi was therefore crucial, as he could be bought and trusted in special services to take certain important photos/film.
The Alma tunnel in the early hours of the morning was abandoned, a perfect circumstance for an ‘accident’ to take place.
It is likely that two people (Andanson and a driver) were in the Fiat Uno that pushed Diana’s car into the 13th pillar by shunting leftwards at the front bumper of the Mercedes. Meanwhile, Andanson was employed to get photographed/filmed evidence of the whole event for whatever reason, perhaps to prove that Diana’s death definitively occurred, while an unknown accomplice drove the Fiat and performed the critical maneuvers; some eyewitnesses reported seeing another person hiding under a ‘tartan’ rug as the Fiat emerged from the Alma Tunnel.
However another witness claims seeing 2 vehicles leave the tunnel,
He returned to his bed briefly but then heard more sounds, returning to the window “to see that a small dark vehicle had completed its turn into Rue Jean Goujon immediately followed by a larger white vehicle (the Fiat Uno)”.
This photo is assumed to have been taken in the Alma tunnel, the Mercedes has obviously sped away from the Paparazzi only to find another vehicle in front, the bright light could be Andanson’s flash as he takes a last picture, just before a driver will perform the shunt maneuver. Remember from the Ritz to the tunnel, it took about 5 minutes. This photo is critical in our understanding of what happened.
The fact Diana is looking out of the rear window suggests in itself that they have made some distance between them and their Paparazzi pursuers, who’d followed them from the Ritz – this indicates isolation or separation; which is funny because what is immediately in front of them is shining a light of some description, a flash from a camera perhaps? The Paparazzi; James Andanson and his white Fiat Uno fits rather well into that criteria, a distraction perhaps – a second dark vehicle was also seen to be present, and may have done the maneuver.
Diana’s bodyguard, Trevor Rees-Jones, the only survivor, also said he thought the car was being followed by a motorbike and two cars, one of which was a white hatchback.
Diana looking out the rear seems to see a single source of light; could this be the light of a motorbike’s single headlamp? Concurring with part of Trevor Rees-Jones’ testimony concerning a motorbike?
Former senior detective John Macnamara explains the subject in this way:
“You have a Mercedes that’s done a 180 degree turn, having crashed into the thirteenth pillar and yet the Fiat Uno survives everything (with minor damages at the point of collision only), which suggests to me that that was a very professional driver. I can well believe, as a detective with 24 years experience, why Mr Al Fayed believes that his son Dodi and Princess Diana were murdered.”
I believe that the Fiat attempted a first shunt maneuver that failed, followed by a second one that succeeded, this explains the lack of tire skids at the crash sight, as the cars had slowed down significantly between the first crash and the second, but not enough to avert the crash – this would have all happened in a matter of seconds.
At 12.25am I heard the noise of an almighty crash followed immediately by the sound of skidding tyres and then immediately a further very loud crash
London solicitor Gary Hunter
The professional nature of the Fiat driver may have included training to not leave obvious tire skids, thus, the skidding sounds that Mr. Hunter heard were almost definitely the Mercedes’ trying to regain control.
The car’s final resting place, this is the vehicle after emergency services cut off the roof/doors to rescue the passengers.
Here’s another car crash at 60 mph for comparison:
…I believe this to be true, because they could have used any car/person to ram the Mercedes but wisely chose Andanson’s vehicle, an (insider, MI6 connected) member of the Paparazzi who could easily be connected to an accidental collision provided eyewitnesses called out the presence of the Fiat, and if Henri Paul could not be successfully framed for drink driving. Fortunately for the plotters, there weren’t any known eyewitness accounts inside the tunnel, not even CCTV, the Fiat Uno story could be easily covered up/ignored, any of the few eyewitnesses were probably ignored by the authorities.
If Andanson spoke out concerning the use of his car, he would implicate himself – threats from the top would keep him in line, in 2000 Andanson apparently claimed he would come forward to discuss the event, having boasted to friends to have ‘explosive’ photos of the crash scene, in May of that year he was found dead in an alleged suicide – but his family disagree that it was suicide; claiming he was in good spirits, having recently received a new job – a suicide is very out of character for a man basking in affluence and success from his photography.
Millionaire photographer James Andanson had been threatening to write an explosive book.
“We just don’t know whether it s a case of a man consigning himself to a bizarre and painful death or whether in fact some violence had been meted out to him first.”
— Mr Al Fayed’s barrister Michael Mansfield QC
“We have always believed this man was part of the team that was behind the assassination, and he was killed to shut him up.”
Witnesses said they saw a white Fiat Uno speed out of the tunnel seconds after the crash.
Before Andanson’s death he’d boasted that he was the driver of a Fiat that hit the back of Diana’s Mercedes (according to one source) which is a remarkable thing to admit.
Less than six hours after the fatal crash in Paris, and for reasons that have never been revealed, Andanson boarded a flight at Paris’s Orly airport, bound for Corsica.
He claimed he had been nowhere near the center of the French capital when the crash happened, but could not provide any real evidence to support this claim.
The sense of urgency that led Henri Paul and co. to the Alma Tunnel:
The Paparazzi had been intentionally tipped off concerning Diana and Dodi’s location throughout that night, prompting Dodi to cancel a romantic meal with Diana due to the harassment of photographers; I believe this constant, unusually high level of harassment gave a staged reason to take the ‘alternative’ route pre-planned by special service personnel, it also gave the reason for Henri Paul ( an ex-French special service member, who was stitched-up and used as a pawn) to speed to get away from the Paparazzi and isolate himself and his clients in the Alma underpass, by the command of his higher ups.
The reason the fireman, Christophe Pelat, who discovered Andanson’s burnt body with two bullet holes in the skull, is reluctant to talk is for the very same reason Trevor Rees claims he cannot remember the crash; both men want to continue living.
It’s very plausible Andanson was shot elsewhere and his body then driven to the field of a military training centre where he was doused with petrol and set alight. The keys of the car he was discovered in have never been found.
Andanson’s true involvement might never be realized, but what we do know was that he had to die, and obviously knew something tellingly critical.
Henri Paul’s carbon monoxide poisoning
The Henri Paul blood samples at the very heart of the Diana controversy reveal something else quite bizarre – that he had breathed in a very high quantity of carbon monoxide before his death: the same amount as a person committing suicide by putting a rubber hose from the exhaust through the window of his car.
One of the last photos taken, this one was allegedly taken in the Alma Tunnel itself, just moments before the crash. Diana anxiously looks behind her, as if to suggest they were being tailed/trying to escape the Paparazzi (which is true). While chauffeur Paul, and Bodyguard Reese seem to be captivated by something bright ahead of them – could this be the ‘dazzling light’ employed to distract them as the Fiat Uno moves in to push them to their fates?
Such a level would have left Paul visibly disorientated and almost certainly comatose. Yet at the Ritz that evening, minutes before he drove Diana, the CCTV cameras show him walking normally and even kneeling down to retie his shoe laces and gracefully standing up again.
Proposed possibility:
Somebody switched Henri Paul’s blood sample with another blood sample in the forensic process; likely of someone who committed suicide by car exhaust. This would frame Paul as culpable for being intoxicated in a way that caused the crash, the media claims a ‘heavy smoking session’ was to blame, but this would not be enough to disorientate Paul, who by CCTV footage seemed able-bodied upon leaving the Ritz.
Carbon monoxide leaks from the wreckage found their way into Henri Paul’s blood supply, in the time between the crash and the point of the recovery of his corpse.
June 1992: Andrew Morton Book.
August 1992: June 1992: Andrew Morton Book.
August 1992: Squidygate tapes.
Consequence : Ostracised by the Royal family, travel and other restrictions , enforced formal separation. WAG is set up and holds first meeting.
November 1995: Panorama interview.
Consequence : Removal from Royal family, Loss of HRH Title ; formal divorce.
January to August 1997: Anti-Landmine Campaigne.
July to August 1997 : Mohammed Holy day St. Tropez, plans for Muhammed – Diana joint Hospice Venture, relationship with Dodi.
Consequence:
Crash in the Alma Tunnel.
Following the 1996 Charles – Diana divorce the Elites had run out of legal options in dealing with Princess Diana’s behaviour.
MI6 carried out the assassinations in conjunction with the CIA and French intelligence agencies. There was a major coverup at the Inquest around the nature of the WAG – Hunt Davis and Fellowes ( the son of a bitch), the only royal witnesses heard, both lied about this. Robert Fellowes was present in Paris on 30 august 1997.
Globalism is promoted as the good guy’s movement for unity, strength and some sort of Utopian, liberal ‘paragon of virtue’ that is exempt from any flaw or impediment.
It disregards the default nature of man, a natural basis that is liable to human error, corruption and subordination of duty – power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely
– the same principle applies to Globalism, or just about anything man influences; directly or indirectly.
Mankind ruling from a national level is bad enough, why escalate such burdens to a global scale?
Tower of Babel, Nimrod’s dream of controlling the world and playing God – Babel Tower was his access to heaven that could never work.
The fact is, anything we do is always susceptible to the sinful tendencies of our bodies, that reality runs throughout every echelon of society to the leaders, who, believe it or not, are human – leaders that portray themselves as some sort of unimpeachable deity are hugely misunderstood – Juncker is on that fateful trajectory.
The EUSSR holds strong ties to internationalized Nazism.
Hitler wanted the EU
Hitler was a great example of a ‘leader’ who attempted, with extensive success, to deify himself in the eyes of his people. His distorted approval rating was manipulated to 99%, he even subverted the Church to sanctify his image as superlative, his inflated ego wrought ruin unto Europe, his deluded dream for a singular European and eventual world state under his arbitrary rule cost countless lives, and set a crash course for a feudal cold war that hasn’t ended yet – this desire for a global state caused major divisions, and not a morsel of ‘unity’ was attained.
The lack of any nations’ intervention towards Hitler’s provocations in the late 1930s period known as appeasement served to legitimize Hitler’s Aryan dream to surpass simply just the modest reclaiming of lost German lands from the confiscations of WW1 through the humiliating Treaty of Versailles. While the EU might masquerade as the solution to this fallacy, it defeats its entire purpose by disenfranchising independent states and their democratic rights, and merging them into itself as a tumorous, horrendous superstate that has overextended itself – The EU is the human ego projected onto excessive statehood, it is never satisfied just being a trade union, it anoints itself as a unilateral political union, this saddening direction is a natural course for the seeds of corruption, and without limitation, will only worsen.
Power in the hands of a few: Centralization
The more that superstates like the EU are buttered up, and craftily sold to the masses as safeguards for our liberty – the more we will be sucked into relinquishing our voting rights in hope of finding a ‘safe haven’ from the oft broadcast terrors of the past century which have all incidentally emerged from false centralization promises; but that ‘safe haven’ is not acquirable in this world, so long as men commit sin – we can only hope to mitigate it, and strive for unity as individuals: not strive to an individual for unity.
We need many nation states to counteract any outburst of centralization, the more divided our capacity to sin through statehood, the more unified we ultimately are. I’m not claiming that we cannot work alongside eachother, I’m saying that we need to limit government to as it was intended; being simply a tool for people to live as freethinking individuals in nations that are self-governed; to dilute and counteract against the threat of ego-driven centralization efforts. We need counter-balancing, healthy competition in the market of politics, as do we need competition to humble big corporations that lose sight of their modesty – to restrain power-hunger.
Ego<Centralization<Ambition<Despotism<Division
We must reinforce grounded humanity to ruling, that comes with an understanding that rule should be limited at every opportunity, a world of self-governed, constitutional, natural law oriented, bottom-up, democratic states that can work alongside one another by treaties, will serve to keep tyranny thinned-out, always challenged & constantly suppressed, and the individuals’ right to self-determination always venerated.
That does not, and cannot equal a one world government.
It cannot equal:
Socialism or Communism, which empowers big government (basically Globalism).
Anarchy, that does not protect the individual, because the basis of anarchy is no law; survival of the fittest, the disadvantaged will die – Anarchy gives way to tribalism, as humans naturally group together so is fundamentally flawed.
Authoritarianism/Statism (basically Globalism).
The sweet spot falls in an area where constitutional values are upheld, Libertarianism with the Bible, and their ‘Live and let live’ mindset works rather well at protecting the individual and championing meritocracy, and stemming the tides of flesh induced sin, the seeds of all divisiveness.
We are to be unified by love and respect of the individuals that reflect in nations: their cultural distinctions, values and traditions; so long as they do not oppress others, we must see that volatility in the name of ‘culture’ is not culture, but malice. That is a mantra I think anyone can agree with, and live by.
That sounds liberal, and I do support classical liberalism, but mainstream ‘liberalism’ has been illiberally tainted to accept volatile cultures that don’t respect other cultures (radical, conservative Islam) in the name of accepting ‘diversity’, vote in superstates (EU) because they seem to ‘unify’ countries (but actually centralize them under one head), vote for a candidate because they are black, or a woman which seems trendy to do to support absolute equality for the sake of seeming open-minded, supporting black lives matter when all lives matter, supporting socialism because it seems to create ‘equality’ and challenge the establishment (but it generates bigger government, makes everyone poorer, and discourages meritocracy), and then begin hating on Donald Trump because he exposes the truth concerning all of the above.
The following text is taken from an article on Theresa May removed by the Telegraph.
“After all, Mrs May’s tenure as Home Secretary has been little better than disastrous – a succession of derelictions that has left Britain’s borders and coastline at least as insecure as they were in 2010, and which mean that British governments still rely on guesswork to estimate how many people enter and leave the country.
People find this hard to credit because she exudes determination and strength. Compared to many of her bland, flabby cabinet colleagues, she has real gravitas. And few who follow British politics would deny that she is a deadly political infighter. Indeed Theresa May is to Westminster what Cersei Lannister is to Westeros in Game of Thrones: no one who challenges her survives undamaged, while the welfare of the realm is of secondary concern.
Theresa May: British police to be deployed to EurosPlay! 00:53
Take the demoralised, underfunded UK Border Force. As the public discovered after a people-smugglers’ vessel ran aground in May, it has has only three cutters protecting 7,700 miles of coastline. Italy by contrast has 600 boats patrolling its 4722 miles.
Considering the impression Mrs May gives of being serious about security, it’s all the more astonishing that she has also allowed the UK’s small airfields to go unpatrolled – despite the vastly increased terrorist threat of the last few years, the onset of the migration crisis, and the emergence of smuggling networks that traffic people, drugs and arms.
Then there is the failure to establish exit checks at all the country’s airports and ports. These were supposed to be in place by March 2015.
Border checks ‘suspended regularly’ since 2007Play! 02:18
Unfortunately the Border Force isn’t the only organisation under Mrs May’s control that is manifestly unfit for purpose. Recent years have seen a cavalcade of Home Office decisions about visas and deportations that suggest a department with a bizarre sense of the national interest.
The most infamous was the refusal of visas to Afghan interpreters who served with the British forces in Afghanistan – as Lord Guthrie said, a national shame.
Mrs May has kept so quiet about this and other scandals – such as the collapse of the eBorders IT system, at cost of almost a billion pounds – that you might imagine someone else was in charge the Home Office.
[It’s not just a matter of the odd error. Yvette Cooper pointed out in 2013 that despite Coalition rhetoric, the number of people refused entry to the UK had dropped by 50 per cent, the backlog of finding failed asylum seekers had gone up and the number of illegal immigrants deported had gone down.]
The reputation for effectiveness that Mrs May nevertheless enjoys derives from a single, endlessly cited event: the occasion in 2014 when she delivered some harsh truths to a conference of the Police Federation.
Cameron: Relaxation of border checks is ‘unacceptable’Play! 00:46
Unfortunately this was an isolated incident that, given the lack of any subsequent (or previous) effort at police reform, seems to have been intended mainly for public consumption.
In general Mrs May has avoided taking on the most serious institutional problems that afflict British policing. These include a disturbing willingness by some forces to let public relations concerns determine policing priorities, widespread overreliance on CCTV, the widespread propensity to massage crime numbers, the extreme risk aversion manifested during the London riots, and the preference for diverting police resources to patrol social media rather than the country’s streets.
There is also little evidence that Mrs May has paid much attention to the failure of several forces to protect vulnerable girls from the ethnically-motivated sexual predation seen in Rotherham and elsewhere. Nor, despite her supposed feminism, has Mrs May’s done much to ensure that girls from certain ethnic groups are protected from forced marriage and genital mutilation. But again, Mrs May has managed to evade criticism for this.
When considering her suitability for party leadership, it’s also worth remembering Mrs May’s notorious “lack of collegiality”.
David Laws’ memoirs paint a vivid picture of a secretive, rigid, controlling, even vengeful minister, so unpleasant to colleagues that a dread of meetings with her was something that cabinet members from both parties could bond over.
Unsurprisingly, Mrs May’s overwhelming concern with taking credit and deflecting blame made for a difficult working relationship with her department, just as her propensity for briefing the press against cabinet colleagues made her its most disliked member in two successive governments.
It is possible that Mrs May’s intimidating ruthlessness could make her the right person to negotiate with EU leaders. However, there’s little in her record to suggest she possesses either strong negotiation skills or the ability to win allies among other leaders, unlike Michael Gove, of whom David Laws wrote “it was possible to disagree with him but impossible to dislike him,”
It’s surely about time – and not too late – for conservatives to look behind Mrs May’s carefully-wrought image and consider if she really is the right person to lead the party and the country.
There’s a vast gulf between being effective in office, and being effective at promoting yourself; it’s not one that Theresa May has yet crossed.”
na offered us reality, she showed up the Royals for what they were, two-faced actors that put it on for glitzy smiles and virtuous gestures, while simultaneously concealing the ugly underbelly of the whole ruse.
two bullet holes in the skull, is reluctant to talk is for the very same reason Trevor Rees claims he cannot remember the crash; both men want to continue living.
The Spearhead Journal 