FEB-FREEDOM NOW-PART 1-2018 - 1994 -Official Website - FEB PT2-2018 )--FEB-FREEDOM NOW-PART 3-2018

FEBRUARY-FREEDOM NOW-PART 4-2018     FEBRUARY-FREEDOM NOW-NEW- HOME PAGE-2018

 ENGLISH DEMOCRATIC PARTY. ORG.UK.

FREEDOM-UNITY.

*

MAR-17 APR-17 MAY-17 JUN-17 JUL-17 AUG-17 SEP-17 OCT-17 NOV-17 DEC-17
JAN-18 FEB-18 MAR-18

APL-18

MAY-18

JUN-18

JUL-18

AUG-18

SEP-18

OCT-18

Est.1994-POLICY-Elections 1997 and EU election 1999-Speech -1000's of Links- IMMIGRATION-ARCHIVE- EU FILE

AFTER 46 YEARS WITHIN THE CONTROL OF BRUSSELS AND BERLIN .

OUR HISTORIC  ENGLISH SEA HIGHWAYS GIVEN AWAY BY THE TRAITOROUS EDWARD HEATH WILL BE RETURNED IN MARCH 2019.

'Ye mariners of England/that guard our native seas/Whose flag has braved a thousand years/The battle and the breeze'.

Thomas Campbell.(1777-1844) Ye Mariners of England*

 

BULLETINS FROM ACROSS THE WORLD

FEBRUARY-FREEDOM NOW-PART 2-2018

 

Nailing the calumny that LEAVE voters are stupid, Cambridge academics launch...

 

BRAINS FOR BREXIT

 

Brains for Brexit! Meet the historians, philosophers, QCs and ex-MI6 boss who make up the 41 top-thinkers fighting the tide of Remain 'propaganda'

  • New site briefingsforbrexit.com challenges view all academics want to Remain
  • Economists, lawyers, philosophers, historians and social scientists are involved
  • Website will challenge 'ludicrous' claims on economic consequences of Brexit 

1k

More than 40 of the country's top thinkers have launched a pro-Brexit campaign to fight the tide of Remain 'propaganda'.

Leading economists, lawyers, philosophers, historians and social scientists want to challenge the impression all academics oppose leaving the EU.

The group, which includes Remain voters, has criticised the contempt shown by those seeking to reverse the referendum result who regard large numbers of Leave supporters as 'unworthy of consideration'.

Trying to overturn that vote 'would outrage democratic sovereignty, cause dangerous and lasting dissension, and make the United Kingdom an international laughing stock', they said.

A new website, briefingsforbrexit.com, will challenge 'ludicrous' claims about the economic consequences of leaving.

It is the brainchild of two Cambridge academics, the historian Professor Robert Tombs and the economist Dr Graham Gudgin.

Other figures who have signed up to the project include former MI6 chief Sir Richard Dearlove, the Labour peer Lord Glasman, the Oxford law professor Dr Richard Ekins and Baroness Ruth Deech, the former chairman of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, The Sunday Times reported.

Dr Gudgin, an emeritus professor at the Judge Business School at the University of Cambridge, and Professor Tombs, emeritus professor of French history at Cambridge and the author of The English And Their History, both voted in favour of entering the Common Market in 1975, but backed Leave in the referendum, concerned about centralisation of powers in Brussels. 

Professor Tombs said: 'To every crisis that comes along, the answer is always more centralisation, never less.'

Dr Gudgin said he came up with the idea for the website 'during one of those terribly pessimistic weeks. When Theresa May wasn't going to last until teatime and there was definitely going to be a second referendum.

'Together we thought, 'Gosh, we ought to be better organised than at the last referendum'.' 

 
 

He added: 'Nobody who appears on the BBC and says 'this is going to be a catastrophe' is ever asked what their view is based on.'

Professor Tombs said his motivation was the 'whole tide of propaganda about how awful everything was, how awful everything was going to be, and we didn't believe this.

'We realised quite a lot of other people didn't believe it either.' They criticised the contempt shown by many Remainers to those who voted Leave.

Professor Tombs said: 'Graham and I have working-class or lower middle-class backgrounds. 

'I do feel you just can't write off a large part of the population as being unworthy of consideration.'

He said he voted Leave because he feared the EU would break up or become 'much more centralised,' adding: 'We've seen how that works in Italy and Greece: A political choice is defeated by sheer weight of economic pressure – if you do this, your currency or economy will collapse.

 

I don't think that would last and I don't see how it could have a good end. I don't think we either want to be, or ought to be, a party to that.'

Professor Tombs said his research found that the narrative of the decline of post-imperial Britain in the mid-20th century – one of the driving forces behind the decision to join the EU – was a myth. 

'I think, speaking as a historian and as a patriot, we were taken into the EU on a misunderstanding of our situation,' he said. 

'It would have been better in the 1960s and 1970s to continue to ask for a free trade agreement.

'I don't think most people understood the full implications of what we were signing up to politically.'

Their analysis of British growth in per-capita GDP since 1952 showed it was better before we joined the bloc than after. Dr Gudgin said recent Government figures which purported to show huge falls in growth in most regions of the EU after Brexit were 'ludicrous'.

 

He led a team of academics who proved that the assumptions behind the Project Fear papers produced by the Treasury before the referendum were wrong, and failed to take account of the fact that Britain was almost the only EU state that had more trade outside the EU than inside.

He criticised its 'extreme assumptions' which led the Treasury to 'an exaggerated estimate of the impact of Brexit'. 

The two academics said there was a rush of interest from other researchers after their project was conceived – but some Brexiteer academics were afraid to go public for fear it would hit their promotion prospects. 

Many universities get a lot of money from the EU, leading to many academics taking a 'narrow, corporatist view'.

Dr Gudgin said: 'One of our contributors said he was told by a younger pro-Brexit colleague that his professor had told him that people who voted Brexit were the sort of people who sent his relatives to concentration camps.'

Professor Tombs added: 'I thought one thing we academics were paid to do was help explain things to people, but universities have become so simple-minded about this.' 

 

 

H.F.1484-BREXIT MEANS BREXIT-NO SURRENDER TO HITLER'S PLAN FOR GERMANY TO DOMINATE EUROPE IN THE PEACE.

 
 

At best, he's guilty of such naivety he shouldn't be allowed out without a nanny

By JOE HAINES

PRESS SECRETARY TO HAROLD WILSON

 

 

Jeremy Corbyn is not a Kim Philby, a Donald Maclean or a Guy Burgess. I say that as one of the most anti-Corbyn voices you will find anywhere.

But unlike the Cambridge Three, he knew nothing that would be immediately useful to an enemy power when the Czechs approached him, and he knows little more now that he is a Privy Councillor.

The KGB, who controlled the diplomat/spies at the satellite Soviet embassies in London, especially the Czechoslovaks and the Bulgarians, realised that. When they courted Labour MPs, it was for their potential, not for their information.

What Corbyn is guilty of, at least, is such astonishing naivety that he shouldn't be allowed out without a nanny.

Why does he think they approached him in the first place? For two decades after he was elected to Parliament in 1983, Corbyn was regarded as the lightest of lightweights. To some of us he still is.

Why did he think the East Germans, whose Stasi secret service was second only to the KGB in its efficiency and ruthlessness, allowed him to take a motorbike holiday through their country with his then girlfriend, Diane Abbott, on his pillion?

 

Jeremy Corbyn (pictured) knew nothing that would be immediately useful to an enemy power when the Czechs approached him, writes Joe Haines

Did he never realise that the Stasi and the Czech intelligence services would be opening files on him?

Of course, he dismisses the stories about him as bizarre, the absurd work of a fantasist. Last night he even released a video — on social media, naturally — in which he cynically accused the Right-wing media of going 'a little bit James Bond', and dismissed the allegations as 'ridiculous smears'. To borrow the celebrated retort of Mandy Rice-Davies: well, he would say that, wouldn't he?

The truth is that if the Czechs did not pursue their relationship with Corbyn —who says he thought his contacts were diplomats, not spies, which was a distinction without a difference — it was because they thought he didn't have any potential.

It was a mistake anyone could make. After all, not even Corbyn himself would have been lunatic enough to imagine he might ever become Prime Minister, or even the Leader of the Opposition. The same goes for John McDonnell. No one ever contemplated that one day he would be a potential Chancellor of the Exchequer.

One of the first problems Corbyn would face if he ever reached No. 10 would be the file on McDonnell presented to him by MI5. The next would be the file on former Guardian journalist Seumas Milne, now Corbyn's all-powerful, Marxist-sympathising communications chief.

And after that, the files on the senior members of his present staff, including several ex-communists.

The advice on all of them would be unanimous: don't employ them in your Government. They were and are defenders of the Soviet Union.

If they were in positions of power in a British Government, then intelligence co-operation with the United States would be non-existent. The Americans wouldn't trust them with the time of day.

Who could blame them?

At the end of World War II, when Winston Churchill suffered a shock defeat by Clem Attlee in the 1945 General Election, the Soviet secret police cast their net wide in Britain in the search for information.

It was not just politicians — journalists and trades union officials were also paid informants. Two of Britain's leading industrial correspondents reported to Moscow regularly on the internal affairs of the Labour Party in the Seventies.

That I know for certain. Others were suspected.

The lobby correspondent of the Daily Worker, the British Communist Party's newspaper (later The Morning Star), and one-time chairman of the parliamentary lobby, Peter Zinkin, was a Soviet agent. That I heard from the highest possible source in the Foreign Office.

I knew Zinkin well and frequently lunched with him at The Gay Hussar, the favourite restaurant of Left-wing journalists. He would try to pump me about Britain's relations with Israel, which was his particular remit.

He didn't know that I knew what he was. He learned nothing. I regarded him as the contact point for the many Left-wing Labour MPs who enjoyed the 'hospitality' of the Soviet and satellite secret services. Slowly the facts are dribbling out — witness Ken Livingstone's admission yesterday that he spent ten days in Russia at the expense of the KGB. Livingstone is many things, but naïve he is not.

(He denies giving any information to a spy who posed as a journalist. He says he thinks they were 'sounding him out' in case he got into a position of power.)

They approached civil servants, too. One day, one of my junior staff at No. 10, came into my office and told me he was having lunch with an attache from the Bulgarian embassy. I exploded. My staff were under strict instructions to tell me in advance of their luncheon engagements, which meant I could veto them.

I consulted the security officer at No. 10. He thought, in terms of protocol, it was too late to cancel the lunch, so I told the junior staff member he could go ahead with it, but warned him severely about what he said and did.

 

Theresa May (pictured) was right this week to call for open and transparent statements from the Labour leader

He came back late from his lunch, over-confident as ever, and told me the attache had been perfectly nice — and had even given him a case of wine. In the Bulgarian embassy.

I exploded again. 'Don't you realise,' I asked, 'that you would have been filmed accepting it?'

No, he didn't.

I confiscated the wine.

Following the unexpected Labour victory in 1945, the News Editor of the Daily Worker crowed that the Communist party had eight 'cryptos' [informants] among the huge influx of new Labour MPs.

Prime Minister Attlee was well aware of the cryptos.

He instructed the powerful general secretary of the party, Morgan Phillips, to draw up a list of those not to be trusted. Morgan did so. He headed the list 'The Lost Sheep'.

In 1948, Attlee sent four of the lost sheep to the political slaughterhouse and expelled them from the party: John Platts-Mills, Leslie Solley, Konni Zilliacus, Hugh Lester Hutchinson, though for some inexplicable reason Zilliacus was allowed back into the party and Parliament a few years later.

He was in receipt of a monthly payment from the Soviets.

Most of the Soviet agents or 'useful idiots' — as Lenin is said to have called those willing to do the Soviets' work without payment — are now dead, but any still alive who visited the Communist Party's headquarters in King Street in London's West End between 1945 and 1970 have good reason to shiver today as old memories are revived.

Anyone at Westminster, in the trades unions and in political journalism between the Sixties and the Eighties who didn't know what the communist secret services were up to was wilfully blind.

They tried to rope in anyone who might be a potential help to their cause.

The unions, in fact, were a better target for the KGB than the Labour Left-wing. It was the unions that had real power.

That's why Jack Jones, the most powerful trade unionist of his day and leader of the Transport and General Workers' Union, was on their agent list. They paid Jones.

When I discovered this in Christopher Andrew's masterly official biography of MI5 and reported it in the traditional Left-wing magazine, Tribune, I was roundly abused by two Labour MPs, one of them the eccentric Tam Dalyell.

When I, in turn, rounded on him, he apologised and admitted that he hadn't read the book. It was just a knee-jerk reaction to one of their heroes being shown to have feet of red clay.

There were other useful idiots in the union movement, including at least one member of Labour's National Executive Committee as well as openly admitted communists. There still are to this day.

The lure of the Soviet and post-Soviet ideology was and is strong. Trotsky and Marx are still idols to many on the left. More than that — they are their guiding lights.

Marx is what moves John McDonnell. I suspect Corbyn is more a Trotsky man.

Theresa May was right this week to call for open and transparent statements from the Labour leader. I doubt if they will come.

What we will get is a steady trickle of new names and old information. And denials, of course.

When they come, remember Mandy Rice-Davies.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-5415545/Corbyn-guilty-naivety.html#ixzz57uTPOBjx
Follow us:
@MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

 

FEBRUARY 21-2018

H.F.1483

 

 

A STORY OF SACRIFICE-THE SPITFIRE -ITS DESIGNER R. J. MITCHELL-A SAVIOUR OF THE SKIES OVER ENGLAND.

Its exactly 70 years [82 years in 2018] since the first Spitfire took to the air. But the plane that won the war almost didn’t make it. Its remarkable designer was fighting a tragic personal battle -and time was running out.

*

RACE FOR

THE SKIES

*

Daily Mail

Saturday, March 4-2006

by

 Tony Rennell

FOR THE many men in her life, it was love at first sight. ‘I was captivated by her sheer beauty,’ declared one of her eminent lovers, a government minister.

‘She was slimly built with a beautifully proportioned body and graceful curves just where they should be. She was every young man’s dream.

 

‘Mind you, she was what mother called a fast girl. I was advised to approach her gently. But once safely embraced in her arms, I found myself reaching heights of delight I had never before experienced.

 

IT WAS NOT A WOMEN that Captain Harold Balfour Under-Secretary of State in the pre-war Ministry of Air, was drooling over back in the thirties [The Gathering Storm years] after his first meeting with HER. It was the British fighter plane that would change the course of history -the

 

Spitfire

 

But for all his passion, even he could not have predicted what a battle-winner she would prove to be. Not that she would come to be the very icon of British guts and defiance. Nor that decades later -into the 21st century in fact-the sight of her flying over London on special anniversaries would bring tears to the eyes of grown men and women.

   

The promise of a Spitfire in the skies can still lure thousands to an Air Show, just for a glimpse of those elegant lines, the purr of that Rolls-Royce engine and all the history and glamour, death and glory, packed into her 31ft fuselage and 37ft wing-span.

 

TOMORROW

Sunday the 5th March 2006 is another historic anniversary.

It is 70 years [In March 2018-it will be 82 years ] to the day since the very first

 

Spitfire

  

Prototype climbed into the skies at

  

Eastleigh in Hampshire

 

-half its fuselage covered in a dirty yellowish-green wash, the rest rough and unpainted.

 

Captain ‘Mutt’ Summers, the Test Pilot, took her up to 3,000 ft and had her back on the ground in 8 minutes later. But in that short time in the air, the prototype won him over.

 

“the handling qualities of this machine are remarkably good “,

 

he wrote in the Test-Flight Log.

 

Destiny awaited. Two days later, on March 7-1936, the troops of a resurgent Germany under Chancellor Adolf Hitler marched over the border to reclaim the Rhineland it had been forced to give up after losing the World War I.

 

The first steps had been taken towards the conflict for which, in every sense, the SPITFIRE was made.

 

It is difficult to overstate her impact on events. The Spitfire’s revolutionary design with its extra edge of speed and manoeuvrability stopped the German Messerschmitts in 1940 that until then had had no match in the skies over Europe.

 

But what these brave men -and many among the generations who had followed -never realised was that the Spitfire so nearly didn’t make it to the drawing board. In a desperate race against time, its brilliant creator Reg. Mitchell was fighting cancer as he put the finishing touches to his design for the aircraft.

 

He lived to see his creation make it into the skies -but died in 1937, two years before the outbreak of the war and never having seen the leanest, meanest fighting machine of its age in combat.

 

He was just 42 years old.

 

Reg Mitchell, or ‘R J’ as he was known is a name generally lost on all but air aficionados these days. So who was he?

 

A new book by his son, Gordon Mitchell, gives a glimpse into the life of this little-known engineering genius.

 

He was a son of a headmaster in Stoke and from his earliest days delighted in making things. He even built his own lathe. He left school at 16, became an apprentice in a railway engineering works and soon graduated to the drawing office.

 

Here his outstanding inventiveness quickly became apparent. Wanting to spread his wings, as it were, he applied for a job at the Supermarine Aviation in Southampton, a firm setting out in the infant business of seaplanes and flying boats.

 

RJ had stumbled on his life’s work and the outlet for his considerable talent.

He shot up the hierarchy until, just 25; he was Chief Designer and Chief Engineer with the job of creating the fastest seaplanes in the world.

 Time and again Mitchell’s planes were entered for the Schneider Trophy, an International Flying Contest over water. His success rate was remarkable as he learned how to streamline an aircraft to get every last knot of speed out of her.

 

In between the wars, with the help of the expert team he built at Supermarine, he designed no fewer than 24 different aircraft. A shy man with a slight stammer, he never pushed himself forward for the headlines his Schneider successes were increasingly grabbing.

 

He gave that glory to the pilots whom he admired for their courage, the more so when two died in accidents in his experimental planes.

 

But if reserved in public, he was a martinet in the office, typically standing staring at his drawing board for hours puffing on his pipe as he worked out complex problems. It was a foolish employee who interrupted him deep in thought.

 

At home, son Gordon remembered flashes of temper, followed by long moody silences. ‘He had no time for anyone he considered a fool and could be rude if the individual concerned did not quickly get the message.

 

Then again, he had great charm, his son recalled, and a sense of fun. When not preoccupied with work, his blue eyes shone and his smile was warm.

 

Mitchell was a very British genius, quiet, retiring, never personally pushy. Nor would he ever be rich, for all his exceptional talent and success.

 

At Supermarine (later part of Vickers), his pay as Chief Designer began at £1,200 a year rising by £100 every December until it reached £2,500.a handsome enough sum for those days and equivalent to £76,000 today.

 

Even after being appointed a Director, he would remain essentially a well-paid employee, in an era when results were not rewarded with share options and ‘fat cat’ bonuses. The patents for his inventions stayed with the company.

 

He brought a large detached house with peaceful gardens and a live in maid in the suburbs, played tennis and golf

And took family holidays at Bournemouth.

 

He was never one for the high life, despite the fast and wealthy international aviation set he sometimes dealt with. He preferred the company of his fellow workers, for whom he had great admiration. His best night out was with the lads at the drawing -room party.

 

His one indulgence was a Rolls Royce car, but since Sir Henry Royce was a fellow engineer and collaborator, that was not surprising.

But by 1933 Mitchell was harbouring a grim secret: He had been diagnosed with bowel cancer. He had a major operation and was fitted with a colostomy bag. Inventive man that he was, he even designed a better bag to conceal his disability.

 

A lesser man would have stopped work, but Mitchell was driven. By the mid-thirties, the world of peaceful international flying competitions began to change to one of more deadly and warlike rivalries. As a result, the Air Ministry in London sought tenders for a fast ‘killer’ fighter plane.

 

Mitchell’s first attempt was a flop. It had an open cockpit and a fixed undercarriage and could reach only 230 mph, 20mph short of the Ministry’s specification and a long way off his 400mph seaplanes.

 

Despite the terrible pain and distress of his illness, he stayed at his design desk as he smoothed out the Spitfire’s problems ahead of her first Test Flight.

 

In the next design, he retained just the name-

 

Spitfire

 

-suggested by the company’s chairman Sir Robert Mclean. It was what he called his feisty daughter, Ann.

 

Everything else changed. The shape of the wings went straight to elliptical. Against all conventional thinking, he also made the wings thin rather than thick. A sliding cockpit canopy gave the pilot al-round vision while reducing drag.

 

A Rolls Royce Merlin engine completed the transformation, and it was the prototype -K5054 - that flew that day 70 years ago.

 

Twelve weeks later, the RAF had its first go in the new fighter; Flight Lieutenant Humphrey Edwardes-Jones took her up at Martlesham Heath, the test aerodrome in Suffolk. He almost crashed her.

A revolutionary aspect of the

 Spitfire

-were wheels that retracted into the wings when in flight to make her more aerodynamic. As he came in to land he almost forgot to drop the undercarriage, and only just recovered in time.

His verdict, telephoned to the Air Ministry was that the Spitfire was

 

‘delightful to handle’

 

-and would be easy for the pilots to learn to fly-as long as they remembered to put the wheels down! Eight days later, the Ministry ordered 310 at a cost of £1.25 million (£38m at today’s prices.)

 

It was Mitchell’s triumph - and with that over, he turned his attention for designing a better, faster bomber for the RAF.

But he ran out of time. In February 1937, in exasperation, he told a visitor:

 

‘I who have so much to do, have only until June.’

 

The next month he finally stopped work.

 

Characteristically, he worried that he was letting people down by not being able to finish the job he had started. Letters from colleagues high and low assured him

 

he had done far more than most.

 

He made one last effort to live, flying by private plane to a cutting edge cancer clinic in Vienna. The treatment did not work.

 

After five weeks the doctors sent him home to die. He sat in his garden, often with the local vicar, and in June, the month he predicted, he died.

 

‘I just felt numb,’ his son, then aged 16, recalled, ‘but I could comprehend that at least he was no longer in pain’

 

Meanwhile, the Spitfire, one of the greatest single-seater fighters of all time was on its way into mass production. The first of more than 20,000 rolled of the production lines in 1938.

 

It would be another two years before it’s

 

FINEST HOUR

 

With Hawker Hurricanes, the other British fighter plane, Spitfires soared over Southern England.

 

In the summer of 1940

as

CHURCHILL’S

Acclaimed

‘FEW’

-fought and won that crucial confrontation with the Luftwaffe.

 The Spitfires took on the enemy Messerschmitt fighters that protected the German bomber formations. The slower Hurricanes then moved in to down the defenceless bombers.

It was a joint victory, but in truth, it was the

 

SPITFIRE

 

-that made the crucial difference and for which

Reg Mitchell

 -remains a largely forgotten hero.

His son, now 85, feels certain his father’s death robbed Britain of yet more world-beating inventions. That bomber, the project he never finished was one example. He was designing it to fly at top speed of 360mph, 25 per cent faster than the Lancaster and the Wellington.

 

How much quicker might Bomber Command have got on top of the Luftwaffe, if its crews had been flying Reg Mitchell’s creation?

 

How much sooner might the war have been won?

 The greatest tragedy of Reg Mitchell’s death at such a sadly early age was that thousands of other lives that given the chance, he might also have saved.

* *

‘Never in the field of human conflict was so much owed by so many to so few.’

 

Speech on the Battle of Britain-

August 1940

by

Winston Churchill.

* * *

 

ADAPTED from:

R. J. Mitchell:

Schooldays to Spitfire

by

Gordon Mitchell

 

Published by Tempus at £12.99

 

To order a copy, telephone 01453 883300.

 

Tony Rennell is a military historian-His latest book is

'Tail -End Charlies'

* * *

 

[Font altered-bolding & underlining used-comments in brackets]

MARCH/06

 

*

 

HITLER'S 1940 BLUEPRINT FOR A GERMAN DOMINATED EUROPEAN UNION  COLLECTIVE HAS ALMOST BEEN COMPLETED ****EUROPEAN UNION EXPOSED-A CRIMINALISED ORGANISATION/****     REVEALED AFTER HIS DEATH THAT EDWARD HEATH AN AGENT OF NAZI INTERNATIONAL AND TRAITOR TO HIS COUNTRY FOR 60 YEAR/ ****     THE TERM DVD STANDS FOR GERMAN DEFENCE AGENCY OR SECRET SERVICE/ ****      FOREIGN POWERS DIRECT OUR GOVERNMENT BY PAYOUTS/****     A TRAITOR FULL OF HONOURS FROM HIS COUNTRY-WHY?/  ****   WHAT WERE THE DARK ACTORS PLAYING GAMES WHICH THE PATRIOT DR DAVID KELLY REFERRED  -[WAS IT AN ILLUMINATI  PLAN TO USE BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS TO REDUCE THE POPULATION OF THE WORLD BY 95%?GERMAN-NAZI-GEOPOLITICAL CENTRE ESTABLISHED IN MADRID IN 1943 BY HEINRICH HIMMLER****     A PLAGUE OF TREACHERY -CORRUPTION AND SKULDUGGERY HAS TAKEN OVER ONCE PROUD DEMOCRACIES?/****     THE ENEMY IS EVERYWHERE/ ****  WARNING FROM OUR MAN IN WASHINGTON/ ****  GERMAN-NAZI-GEOPOLITICAL CENTRE/GERMANY AS  STRONGMAN OF EUROPE- GERMANISED EMPIRE IN THE MAKING/ ****  A WARNING MESSAGE TO THE FREEDOM LOVING PEOPLE OF ENGLAND/****    50 YEARS OF SURRENDER/ **** BRITAIN CAN LEAVE THE EU UNILATERALLY AND CEASE PAYMENT SAYS QUEEN'S COUNSEL.****NAZI PENETRATION OF GERMANY'S POST WAR STRUCTURES****WILFUL BLINDNESS AND COWARDNESS OF POLITICIANS****AN INTERVIEW WITH FORMER SOVIET DISSIDENT VLADIMIR BUKOVSKY WARNS OF EU DICTATORSHIP.**** THE DAY A NATION STATE WAS DOOMED?****AN ABOLITION OF PARLIAMENT BILL? PART2****Former Nazi Bank Bank of International Settlements To Rule The Global Economy

H.F.1376

 

LITTLEJOHN

 

Let's have another referendum - on scrapping the House of Lords:

RICHARD LITTLEJOHN says he reckons a lot more than

 17.4 million would vote

 to kill off the Upper House

Freedom of speech is under renewed attack, this time from unelected members of the House of Lords. They have hijacked a bill designed to update Britain's data protection laws to launch an outrageous attempt to shackle the Press.

By a slim majority, peers voted this week to compel newspapers who refuse to sign up for state regulation to pay the legal costs of anyone who brings a complaint against them, regardless of merit.

If they succeed, the financial implications could force some smaller, local papers out of business. It would give carte blanche to crooks and fraudsters to bring actions seeking to gag national newspaper investigations into their nefarious activities, secure in the knowledge that even if they lost it wouldn't cost them a penny.

This is precisely the clause which Parliament threw out last year in relation to vexatious libel claims. Now the Lords are trying to smuggle it in under the guise of data protection.

They are also looking to resurrect the second stage of the ludicrous Leveson Inquiry into the Press, which everyone thought was dead and buried.

The last one was little more than a show trial and most of the parallel criminal cases brought against innocent journalists collapsed ignominiously when they came before a jury.

 

The House of Lords has hijacked a bill designed to update Britain's data protection laws to launch an outrageous attempt to shackle the Press

None of that has deterred their Lordships from straining to get the circus back on the road. For once, the chamber was packed to the gunnels. Normally, the Lords resembles the bridge of the Mary Celeste, save for a few old sweats slumbering away on the well-upholstered leather benches.

Like many of their colleagues in the Commons, some peers are still smarting from newspaper exposures of wrongdoing by members of the Upper Chamber — everything from expenses fiddling, to coke-snorting and consorting with whores.

So they have seized their chance for revenge by using the Data Protection Bill to punish the Press — a purpose for which it was never designed.

Matthew Hancock, the new Culture Secretary, has promised to resist the Lords and overturn the amendments when the Bill comes back to the Commons.

But with the Government's wafer-thin, DUP-bolstered majority, there is a danger some Tory Brexit saboteurs — who have had a well-deserved hammering in newspapers including the Mail — may vote with Labour and the Lib Dems, who are both committed to stifling free speech.

I'm always wary of writing about the Press, because it can appear to be special pleading. But this isn't newspaper navel-gazing, it goes to the heart of what passes for our democracy.

Unelected peers, along with the opposition parties, are trying to bring the Press under the control of a new state regulator, bankrolled by ex-Formula 1 boss Max Mosley — who has been seeking his revenge on Fleet Street ever since the now-defunct News of the World exposed him for taking part in military-themed S&M orgies with prostitutes.

The regulator, called Impress, is stuffed with embittered failed journalists, Left-wing lobbyists and professional Press-haters.

This is the rabble that a majority of peers and a significant number of MPs think should have the final say in what you read in your daily newspapers.

 

Unelected peers, along with the opposition parties, are trying to bring the Press under the control of a new state regulator

No self-respecting publication of note has signed up for Impress, preferring to submit voluntarily to an independent regulatory body called IPSO, chaired by a distinguished and scrupulously impartial former Appeal Court judge, who has the power to order front-page corrections and impose fines of up to £1 million.

That clearly isn't good enough for some politicians, who want to control what appears in the Press, largely to spare themselves embarrassment.

Many of them in the Remain camp, especially, blame the Daily Mail and other publications for 'poisoning' the minds of gullible readers and tricking them into voting Leave. Their contempt for the newspaper-buying public knows no bounds.

Freedom of the Press is under unprecedented pressure, not just from politicians, but from self-appointed bigots trying to bully companies into withdrawing advertising from publications of which they disapprove. Virgin Trains' decision to stop selling the Mail is just the latest pathetic piece of politically motivated posturing aimed at appeasing those who want to silence every single opinion they disagree with.

But there's a much bigger picture here.

This isn't just about Press freedom, it's about the way in which we are governed. What the political class still haven't grasped properly about the Brexit vote is that it wasn't just a rejection of the EU, it was a vote of no confidence in the whole rotten shower of them.

It's bad enough when MPs seek to thwart the will of the people. But when unelected peers try to do the same, it's a coup against democracy.

Remoaners in the House of Lords are pledging to stop

Brexit

by any means possible. Where do these pampered, pompous poltroons get the idea that they have a divine right to sabotage

 a clear decision taken by 17.4 million people — the largest number ever to vote for anything in Britain?

Remoaners in the House of Lords are pledging to stop Brexit by any means possible, writes Richard Littlejohn 

We voted to free ourselves from an unelected, unaccountable government in Europe. Why should we now have our future decided by an unelected, unaccountable second chamber at home?

The effrontery of peers such as the absurd Andrew Adonis, a self-important quangocrat who has never been elected to anything in his life, is staggering.

So, too, Cheerful Charlie Falconer, one of the architects of this week's Lords offensive against the Press. He owes his entire political career to the fact that he was once Tony Blair's flatmate.

In 1999, when Blair got rid of the hereditaries, there were 610 members of the Lords. Today, there are 800 of them. The crusty old aristos have been replaced by a pretty unsavoury collection of political placemen, has-beens, never-wases, PR spivs and party donors.

An ermine robe is a reward for failure. The Lib Dems may have only 12 MPs (just eight in England) as a result of being roundly rejected at the ballot box. But they've got more than 100 peers in the Lords — all of whom are pledged to overturn the Brexit vote.

They can claim £300 a day tax free simply for turning up, which is about all most of them can be bothered to do.

There are plenty of well-documented examples of noble lords clocking in, claiming their allowance, and then clocking straight out again.

Two of them served jail time for fraud as a result of the expenses scandal. No wonder the Lords want to punish the newspapers which exposed them.

Brexit, when we finally get round to it, has given us the opportunity to forge a brand-new future, to liberate the way this country is governed, to make politicians properly accountable to the people who pay their wages.

Maybe we should begin with a referendum on abolishing the House of Lords once and for all.

If that were to happen, I'd wager that many more than 17.4 million would vote to kill it off. And not before time. It is an anachronism which no longer serves any useful purpose.

Until now, reform of the Lords has always been hampered by the fact that no one seems to be able to decide what should replace it.

Who cares?

Why replace it with anything, especially as these days the courts seem to have assumed the function of the second chamber?

With any luck, in attempting to defy the will of the people over Brexit and cynically seeking to shackle freedom of speech,

these arrogant Lords might just have signed their own death warrant.

*  *  *
 

I love, I love, I love my little calendar girls 

Call me male, pale and stale, but that picture of Theresa May and her new female whips at No 10 reminded me of the cast of the movie Calendar Girls, starring Celia Imrie, about the Rylstone and District branch of the Women's Institute.

I can't wait for the calendar, girls.

*Call me male, pale and stale, but that picture of Theresa May and her new female whips at No 10 reminded me of the cast of the movie Calendar Girls

 

Actress Celia Imrie (pictured) posing in her famous scene from the 2003 film Calendar Girls

 

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-5260945/Lets-referendum-scrapping-House-Lords.html#ixzz5441IEpiC
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

*  *  *

 

'Let it be impressed upon your minds, let it be instilled into your children that the liberty of the press is the palladium of all civil, political, and religious rights.'-

Junius

*

The press is not only free, it is powerful. That power is ours. It is the proudest that man can enjoy.  It was not granted by monarchs; it was not gained for us by aristocracies; but it sprang from the people

[YOU!]

and with an immortal instinct, it has always worked for the people.-Disraeli.

[DON'T LET THE  UNREPRESENTATIVE   HOUSE OF LORDS GET THEIR WAY.]

ITS YOUR FREE PRESS

DON'T LOSE IT!]

The Labour man Party manifesto of 1935 called for the abolition of the House of Lords but in 1945 no such proposal was evident.

[The answer as many have voiced over the years is for a representative House of Lords selected for their already proven ability in other spheres of life and not those who's only interest is the need of a daily cash machine to encourage them  to

SERVE THEIR COUNTRY.]

[COMMENTS ARE OURS!]

 

JANUARY 12,2018

 

H.F.1436

A GIANT PONZI SCHEME THAT DESRVED TO GO TO THE WALL

 

...even though Carillions collapse

 shames CAPITALISM

and puts the wind in Labour's sails says ALEX BRUMMER

 

News for DAILY MAIL-A GIANT PONZI SCHEME THAT DESERVED TO GO TO THE WALL by ALEX BRUMMER

 

ALEX BRUMMER: A giant Ponzi scheme that deserved to go to the wall... even though Carillion's collapse shames capitalism and puts the wind in Labour's sails



Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-5273135/ALEX-BRUMMER-Carillion-deserved-wall.html#ixzz54RK5sa9n
Follow us:
@MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

 

 

The collapse of the Wolverhampton -based construction group Carillion is catastrophic for its 43,000 employees at home and overseas, for the Government and for members of the stricken pension fund.

It represents a nadir for the private sector outsourcing companies which, since the era of Tony Blair and Gordon Brown, have been relied upon to deliver all manner of public services, from building hospitals and schools to modernising the NHS and even providing school meals.

In the fierce scramble for business among these behemoths, Carillion was so desperate for contracts that it consistently overpromised on the work it could do for an agreed cost. When it failed to deliver on time and on price, as was the case with the new 646-bed Royal Liverpool hospital, the group went on a borrowing spree.

 

More than 20,000 jobs in the UK, and more overseas, are at risk after Carillion ran out of time to find a way to restructure its £1.5bn debt burden. Pictured: A staff member outside an office in London

Its debts grew to £900 million, an impossibly large sum to manage when its share price was going into freefall during the course of last year.

Plunge

In effect Carillion, chaired by former water company boss Philip Green, had become a mammoth Ponzi scheme in which the cash promised or received for newer contracts was effectively being used to cover up the black holes on the older contracts.

Why Carillion has careered into crisis 

The Wolverhampton-based firm, the backbone behind a raft of public infrastructure projects, is teetering over a precipice.

The company is the second largest construction firm in the UK but has debts of about £1.5billion and a pension fund shortfall of almost £600million. 

So how has it got into this mess? Most analysts agree that the answer is simple. It has over-reached itself.

Carillion they argue has its fingers in too many pies at homes and abroad from the Battersea Power station redevelopment in the UK to operations in Canada, the Middle East and the Caribbean.

The company's incessant desire to expand has resulted in it pursuing too many risky contracts - some accompanied by questionable accounting practices - that have become increasingly unprofitable. 

It has furthermore faced delays in payments in the Middle East.

The firm in recent months has found  it much harder to manage its mountainous debt pile and pension deficit.

In December Carillion managed to persuade lenders to give it more time to repay them. But the company's banks are now understood to be unwilling to lend it any more cash.

What is unconscionable in all this is that over the past two decades, before its troubles emerged, Carillion paid out vast sums in dividends to shareholders (seeking to keep them sweet) and bonuses to fat-cat directors — including former chief executive Richard Howson, dismissed last July — yet allowed the pension fund deficit to balloon to an officially estimated £900 million.

The burden of sorting this out will now fall squarely on bail-out body the Pension Protection Fund, which is financed by raising a levy on the functioning pension schemes into which millions of us contribute.

Among the more astonishing aspects of the scandal is that even as Carillion’s share price plunged in the second half of last year, Transport Secretary Chris Grayling, as well as other ministers and civil servants, still felt it was safe to gift the firm new contracts. City investors and hedge funders had already recognised that the company was struggling for survival and could no longer pay its thousands of suppliers in good time. If ever there was a case of the Government throwing good money after bad, this was it.

The business-friendly Tory Government, deliberately or naively, awarded Carillion three new contracts within days of the company admitting several major projects had gone wrong to the tune of £800 million — an announcement that provoked a 30 per cent plunge in the group’s shares last July.

A week after that first public warning that it was all going to hell in a handcart, Grayling’s department revealed that Carillion would partner another construction group on a £1.4 billion contract to work on the flagship £56 billion HS2 railway project.

Days later, Carillion was told by the Ministry of Defence it had been chosen to provide ‘catering, retail and leisure’ services for 233 military facilities. These contracts provided some temporary relief for the firm’s books.

But confidence in Carillon’s ability to manage the crisis, in spite of the new contracts, was fading fast, and in September it warned again that profits would fall short of expectations.

Yet the Government still gambled that it was a good bet, and awarded it a key infrastructure project to electrify the railway connecting Corby in Northamptonshire with London.

Ironically, the contracts for these large-scale, taxpayer-funded projects were given out at a time when Carillion’s chief executive and finance director were departing, and the share price was tanking. Yet Whitehall, in their naivety, sailed serenely on.

The collapse of Carillion comes hard on the heels of the decision by Virgin Trains and its partner Stagecoach to hand back the East Coast railway service to the Government, at a potential taxpayer cost of £2 billion. These two disasters have not only left the Government looking very silly, but also given a fillip to those supporters of Jeremy Corbyn on the Left who are convinced capitalism is wicked, and that only re-nationalisation of public services is the answer.

 

Carillion workers lined up outside a staff office to check on the status of their jobs in London yesterday morning

Sure enough, Shadow Cabinet Office minister Jon Trickett has been quick to exploit the misfortunes of Carillion’s workforce and pensioners, asking what ‘due diligence measures were undertaken before awarding contracts worth billions of taxpayer money’.

Failure

What he failed to acknowledge is that the most enthusiastic embrace of private outsourcing companies came during the last Labour government, which used firms such as Carillion to replace Britain’s Victorian hospitals, to build modern schools, expand universities and begin the process of updating the nation’s railways and roads.

Much went wrong at Carillion, including the failure of highly paid auditors KPMG to lay bare the company’s parlous financial state.

But then independent directors and major investors failed to question a record dividend payout to investors of nearly £80 million in 2016, even as the company headed for the rocks and the huge shortfall in the pension fund grew ever larger. (Labour MP Frank Field, who chairs the Pensions Select Committee, castigated Carillion for taking on ‘mega borrowings while its pension deficit ballooned’.)

None of these attacks can be very comfortable for Baroness (Sally) Morgan, former political secretary to Tony Blair, who joined the Carillion board as an independent director in June 2017, shortly before the fateful disclosure to the stock market that the company was in deep trouble.

The collapse of Carillion also shines a light on the wider outsourcing industry, and the ability of huge private firms to be responsible capitalists when they are given hundreds of millions in public money.

Other companies including Serco, Mitie, Balfour Beatty and G4S have all experienced difficulties with Government contracts: there has been a tendency for them to take on too much and become financially over-stretched.

Stupidity

With the help of experts in company turnarounds, some have managed to clean up the contracts under their management and bounce back.

But it’s too late for Carillion, which ran its affairs in a helter-skelter, irresponsible manner, yet still managed to keep the Government on side until the very end. Some have questioned why the Tories chose not to bail the firm out in the way it seems to have done with the train companies running the East Coast line.

But that surely would have sparked public fury — after all, if capitalism is to survive and thrive as Britain’s chosen economic model then weakness or stupidity must not be allowed to flourish.

Of course, Carillion’s collapse is a dreadful blow, and even now it will prove expensive for taxpayers, who will have to fund the company’s most vital operations until the insolvency practitioners can sell on the contracts.

But it would be a serious misjudgment if this debacle were used as an excuse for bringing an end to the role of private enterprise in building more efficient public services.

Enterprise and ambition in business have been the lifeblood of Britain for centuries. What a shame that it took the collapse of Carillion to remind us how it should not be done.

 

 

 

H.F.1439

NEW  BREXIT MINISTER

BACKS

NO DEAL

[RATHER THAN KOW- TOW

TO

BRUSSELS AND BERLIN]

Brexit minister who backs no deal: Meteoric rise of leading Eurosceptic after she is given junior position in the department after only becoming an MP in 2015

  • Suella Fernandes was promoted to be a new junior minister in Brexit Department
  • The 37-year-old was elected to Parliament in 2015 and said no deal will be 'great'
  • She is now in the Department for Exiting the European Union, led by David Davis

 

 

Suella Fernandes (pictured) said leaving the EU without a deal would be 'great' for the UK

The Brexit Department has been beefed up with the appointment of a leading Eurosceptic who says leaving the EU without a deal would be 'great' for Britain.

Fareham MP Suella Fernandes, a former barrister, is chairman of the influential European Research Group of pro-Brexit backbench Tories.

Her promotion to a junior ministerial post marks a meteoric rise for the 37-year-old, who was elected to Parliament in 2015.

A daughter of immigrants from Kenya and Mauritius, she has previously declared her determination to make Britain a 'fully sovereign trading nation' once again after Brexit.

She grew up in Wembley, North London. Her mother was a nurse who worked in the NHS for 45 years and her father worked for a housing association.

She won a scholarship to an independent school and studied law at Cambridge where she was chairman of the Cambridge University Conservative Association.

Miss Fernandes says that in 15 years, Brexit 'will be seen as the best thing that has happened to our country'.

She added: 'In the event of no deal, that's great as well for us.

'The ideal is a free trade agreement but in the event of that not working, no deal is something we will capitalise on using our strengths and the opportunities that brings.'

In her maiden speech to the House of Commons, Miss Fernandes said it was 'a stroke of luck to be born British, and my indebtedness goes to the heart of why I am a Conservative'.

 

Ms Fernandes has joined the Department for Exiting the European Union, which is led by David Davis (pictured) 

She added: 'Our party rewards endeavour, enables compassion and liberates people from the shackles of the State. Our party says, 'It doesn't matter where you start. You can make your life and that of others better by taking responsibility and through self-empowerment and generosity'.'

The Department for Exiting the European Union – known as DExEU – which is led by David Davis, now has three junior ministers in the Commons – Miss Fernandes, Robin Walker and Steve Baker.

At the end of her reshuffle, Theresa May had carefully preserved the balance within Cabinet of Leavers and Remainers. The new Work and Pensions Secretary, Esther McVey, backed Brexit.

Two pro-Remain MPs, Claire Perry and Caroline Nokes, will also attend Cabinet.

The most eye-catching promotion on Monday was of David Liddington, a former Europe minister and Remainer, who takes Damian Green's Cabinet Office job, but without the First Secretary of State title. He is seen as a like-for-like replacement. However, there was no job for Jacob Rees-Mogg, a prominent Eurosceptic.

[Obviously, his quiet sensible straight forward utterings on Brexit and many other matters are an embarrassment to certain members of the Government.]

Theresa May carefully preserved the balance within Cabinet of Leavers and Remainers.

[The seriousness of obtaining a Brexit dominance in the Cabinet appears to be downplayed in order to appear even-handed, but in reality, this should not be so , as a majority of voters demanded to LEAVE THE EU and a Brexit majority in the Cabinet should reflect their decision.  IN time of war, as in 1939/1940, the Cabinet was of two frames of mind how to pursue the war  and the predominant view was with vigour and tenacity. In that day,-it was first Neville Chamberlain followed in 1940 by a man of action and leadership Winston Churchill.  In our day we have our Neville Chamberlain and we have yet to have our Winston Churchill, but a Jacob Rees-Mog certainly fits the picture.]

Contrary to one report, there was no evidence of the appointment of a 'minister for no deal'. On Monday it was suggested the reshuffle would involve a Cabinet-level appointment of a 'no deal' minister to deal with preparations for the collapse of talks. As well as attending Cabinet the minister would 'control a significant budget', the Daily Telegraph reported.

In June, Miss Fernandes succeeded Mr Baker as chairman of the ERG, the main Eurosceptic group of Tory MPs. At the time, she said: 'The next two years will be crucial in the transition of the UK into a fully sovereign trading nation. I don't believe in a 'hard' Brexit or a 'soft' Brexit; I am passionate about a pro-business and jobs-led Brexit which will increase our country's prosperity.'

The group has played a key role in organising Eurosceptic MPs to get behind the Government.

  • Jeremy Corbyn has infuriated Remainers in his party by reminding them that Britain voted to quit the single market.

Leading Europhile MP Chuka Umunna walked out of a meeting of the Parliamentary Labour Party in disgust as the Labour leader unveiled his vision.

Mr Corbyn told pro-EU Labour MPs at the meeting on Monday night that he would not support their bid to keep Britain in the single market because that was not what voters wanted.

It is the latest clash between the hard-Left Labour leadership, which is known to be lukewarm towards the EU, and most of the party's MPs and members who want continued close co-operation.

One MP told Sky News: 'Jeremy said that when people voted to leave the EU, they voted to leave the single market. Single market membership requires us to be members of the EU...'

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5252679/Minister-backs-no-deal-Meteoric-rise-Eurosceptic.html#ixzz53saOgMVO
Follow us:
@MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

JANUARY 10-2018

 

[COMMENTS IN BRACKETS ARE OURS!]

 

H.F.1433

 

THREAT TO A FREE PRESS

 

TODAY, the unelected House of Lords launches the latest in a long line of attacks on Press Freedom.

A group of peers wants to hijack an important piece of legislation-the

DATA PROTECTION ACT

-by inserting an amendment which would force the Government to launch yet another inquiry into Britain's newspapers.

It would echo the much delayed and probably soon to be abandoned

LEVESON 2 -

 but with one crucial and cynical difference.

The thrust of Leveson 2 would have been to investigate whether the Metropolitan Police and politicians failed to investigate phone-hacking allegations properly because of their links with the newspaper groups responsible.

THIS INQUIRY would let the POLICE and POLITICIANS - off the hook completely, while subjecting the PRESS to another hugely costly and time-consuming inquiry.

More than £43 MILLION has already been spent

on various police probes and resulting trials, in addition to the

£5.4 MILLION

cost of the original

Leveson Inquiry.

Its hard to see the point of this new

INQUISITION

-unless its to discourage journalists from holding those who rule us to account.

*  *  *

'Let it be impressed upon your minds, let it be instilled into your children that the liberty of the press is the palladium of all civil, political, and religious rights.'-

Junius

The press is not only free, it is powerful. That power is ours. It is the proudest that man can enjoy.  It was not granted by monarchs; it was not gained for us by aristocracies; but it sprang from the people

[YOU!]

and with an immortal instinct, it has always worked for the people.-Disraeli.

[DON'T LET THE  UNREPRESENTATIVE   HOUSE OF LORDS GET THEIR WAY.]

ITS YOUR FREE PRESS

DON'T LOSE IT!]

The Labour man Party manifesto of 1935 called for the abolition of the House of Lords but in 1945 no such proposal was evident.

[The answer as many have voiced over the years is for a representative House of Lords selected for their already proven ability in other spheres of life and not those who's only interest is the need of a daily cash machine to encourage them  to

SERVE THEIR COUNTRY.]

DAILY MAIL

DECEMBER 10-2018

[COMMENTS IN BRACKETS ARE OURS!]

H.F.1432

GREED THAT SHAMES BRITAIN

ALEX BRUMMER: Boardroom greed shames Britain and insults a generation of young people

Efforts to curb pay in Britain’s boardrooms and outsize rewards in the City are still failing. 

In spite of the resignations of the senior independent directors at housebuilder Persimmon there is no public sign so far of chief executive Jeff Fairburn giving up any of his total pay, bonuses and incentive package of £110million.

The scale of his award is an insult to a generation of young people in Britain who now need an £80,000 deposit to get on the housing ladder.

Moreover, the £400million to be shared among the next layer of Persimmon bosses does not sit well in a country grotesquely short of social housing, where private sector builders seek to minimise the amount of land and resources devoted to the less well-off. 

 

Grotesque: There is no public sign so far of Persimmon chief executive Jeff Fairburn giving up any of his total pay, bonuses and incentive package of £110m

Persimmon may appear to represent the worst of the bitter divisions in our society. But who could not feel queasy at the sight of one of the plumpest panjandrums of investment banking, Sir Simon Robey, collecting £37million for advising on a series of deals which weakened the fabric of Britain.

Robey and colleagues at Robey Warshaw should be in the stocks for advising Japanese titan Softbank on the purchase of UK smart chipmaker ARM, and promoting the hugely misjudged, aborted London Stock Exchange deal with Deutsche Boerse.

The collapsed merger saw executives at both exchanges thrown to the wolves, and the LSE destabilised, while the bosses of Robey Warshaw split £63.3million.

It would be nice to think of Robey rolling up his sleeves at a charity like Toynbee Hall or the local homeless shelter rather than lording it up as he once did as chairman of the Royal Opera House.

The public owes a debt of gratitude this week to the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development and the High Pay Centre for shining a brilliant light on the gross inequalities that exist within Britain’s FTSE 100 companies. 

Together, they calculate that in the last year the average pay of bosses was 120 times that of a full-time employee on the median wage.

A week earlier, Vlerick Business School in Belgium found that of 861 public companies in Europe the pay gulf between those at the top and employees was greatest in Britain.

What is most startling about this is that executives have been allowed to help themselves by compliant boards at a moment in history when the incomes of ordinary Britons have been squeezed by the financial crisis and the fall in the pound.

The sacrifices have been made by staff while business leaders enjoy the good life, in some cases irrespective of performance.

There are some signs attitudes are changing. The Pensions and Lifetime Savings Association has called on boards to ‘be more sceptical about the need for vast executive pay awards’.

It noted that big pay gaps show that too many companies fail to appreciate the value of their workers.

Worse than that, companies in trouble such as Bernard Matthews, Toys R Us and Palmer & Harvey have tried to escape pension obligations built up over a lifetime to loyal workforces. 

The need for boardroom pay to be approved by investors in non-binding votes at annual meetings has helped, with the bosses of the UK’s top companies earning 17 per cent less on average in 2016 than a year earlier.

The added requirement by the Government that annual reports will have to show the pay ratio between chief executives and the average worker should also ramp up the public outrage.

Whether that will make much difference in the most extreme cases such as Sir Martin Sorrell at WPP, who earned £48million in 2017 (down from £70million the year before), is hard to tell.

What is certain is that pension funds and big investors like BlackRock, with £5.7trillion under management, need to keep up the pressure by opposing fat cat deals.

As we have seen time and time again a company’s investors cannot count on supine pay committees, often headed by the weakest link among the directors, to take on the bosses.

Bringing real discipline to pay in the boardroom may require the Government to turn non-binding votes into law, with dissent of 20 per cent of investors requiring action.

If the Tories don’t do it we can be sure that Jeremy Corbyn and his frightening Marxist sidekick, John McDonnell, won’t hesitate to act.

[The unacceptable face of capitalism is still in evidence with the Conservative Party membership reflecting the inability of the party to control the City and its impenetrable defences against CHANGE from fornicator to friend of the PEOPLE.]

The CITY MILE is a financial loose cannon instead of a DUAL- controlled economic force for the benefit of all the PEOPLE and COUNTRY.

 

*

 

[COMMENTS IN BRACKETS ARE OURS!]

JANUARY 6,2018

H.F.1433

 

 

Lets return to our old values, says, Rees-Mogg.

BY Jason Groves-Political Editor-Daily Mail -Monday, January 8,2018

 

 

THERESA May must return to Tory values of individual choice and free trade, Jacob Rees-Mogg has warned.

He fears the Conservatives will lose further ground to Jeremy Corbyn unless the Prime Minister goes back to

'First Principles'.

The prominent Brexiteer is tipped by some as a future Tory leader, although he is not expected to be given a ministerial position in Mrs May's reshuffle.

Mr Rees-Mogg also warned that the poor relationship between Mrs May and Chancellor Philip Hammond is hampering government.

And he encouraged ministers to embrace

BREXIT,

saying that the government had been 'too timid'. Writing in the Sun, Rees Mogg urged the PM to put clear blue water between the Tories and Labour by highlighting the fundamental 'dividing lines' between the two parties.

'Tories want to help people to ,lead lives they want and to remove as many obstacies as possible,' he said.

'The socialist aims to cajole people into leading lives that are "good" for them. Tories are more realistic about human nature and generally more pragmatic.

Some Eurosceptics have privately urged Mrs May to sack her Chancellor into today's reshuffle to prevent him watering down Brexit.

Mr Rees-Mogg said: 'The whole government machine ought to be directed towards the benefit of Brexit and not the timorous efforts of managing decline, a recipe for failure popular with too many post-war British politicians.'

'In this regard, it is essential that the PM and Chancellor improve their working relationship and advocate the same policies. No government works when these two figures are not united.'

Mr Ress-Mogg said Brexit could bring huge benefits, including cheaper prices and real control over Britain's future. But he added: 'Here the Government has been too timid. It is as if it were carrying out a policy reluctantly- one foist upon it by the electorate, not one it really and enthusiastically wants.'

[And the past events or more precisely non-events since the referendum have confirmed this analysis.]

 

 

 

This isn't the Britain we fought for,' say the 'unknown warriors' of WWII
 


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1229643/This-isnt-Britain-fought-say-unknown-warriors-WWII.html#ixzz53txyBNPw
Follow us:
@MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

[COMMENTS IN BRACKETS ARE OURS!]

January 8,2018

H.F.1435

Why Merkel's humiliation could be just

the

BREXIT BOAST

we

NEED.

Why Angela Merkel's humiliation is Brexit boost we need | Daily Mail ..

 

November 21,2017

 

by

 Mark Almond.

 

Angela Merkel's 12-year dominance of Europe would appear to be wobbling towards a humiliating end.

With it comes great uncertainty for the Continent — but also, I would argue, an opportunity not to be missed for Britain in its Brexit negotiations.

On Sunday night, the German Chancellor's two-month-long effort to stitch together a coalition following her party's poor showing in September's election collapsed. Immigration policy was the main point dividing the parties.

Now Germany faces another election in the New Year, or its first post-war minority government. Either way, there is a big question mark over Mrs Merkel's future. 

Crisis

It is possible that her party, the Christian Democratic Union, will want a new leader to fight the next election. Many Germans  see her now as a vote-losing 'albatross' who attracted the smallest share of the party's vote since 1949. 

 

On Sunday night, German Chancellor Angela Merkel's two-month-long effort to stitch together a coalition following her party's poor showing in September's election collapsed. Now Germany faces another election in the New Year, or its first post-war minority government. Either way, there is a big question mark over Mrs Merkel's future, writes Mark Almond 

 

At least Theresa May (pictured) has Ulster's Democratic Unionist Party to carry her to a slim majority. Mrs Merkel is left well short of one, writes Mark Almond 

Many Germans see her now as a vote-losing 'albatross' who attracted the smallest share of the party's vote since 1949.

Alternatively, as leader of a minority government, she would be far weaker than our own somewhat beleaguered Prime Minister. 

At least Theresa May has Ulster's Democratic Unionist Party to carry her to a slim majority. Mrs Merkel is left well short of one.

The unfolding political crisis in Germany is hitting Brussels where it hurts. Berlin has always been the engine-room of the Euro-supertanker.

Without that impetus, it is clear the EU project has not just stalled — it is sinking. The crew are pulling in all directions. 

Some calling for even greater integration, others for letting everyone set their own course.

In essence, Germany's problems can be summed up as the Three Ms: Migration, Money and Merkel.

Since 2005, when she became Chancellor, Angela Merkel has largely ridden roughshod over her political colleagues at home and in the rest of EU. 

Then she made two highly personal decisions that are key to her problems now.

 

Mrs Merkel is pictured leaving a meeting with German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier 

In 2016, she reversed her policy on immigration overnight to welcome in more than a million asylum-seekers from the Muslim world.

It was a widely unpopular move and certainly unsettling for many Germans. (In part, her coalition talks with the Left-wing Greens and the pro-business Free Democrats floundered over limits on the number of refugees accepted into Germany, and family reunions for asylum-seekers.)

Also, there was Mrs Merkel's decision to impose a bailout of the Euro-zone, despite the single currency's rules forbidding it, and the German courts ruling that it was not permissible.

In doing so she added a huge burden to the German public purse — asylum-seekers, like bailouts, have to be paid for — at a time when so many Germans were feeling the pinch of below-inflation pay-rises and high taxes.

Just as Remainers in the UK were often oblivious to the rational economic and social concerns about mass migration that animated the Leave vote, German Euro-enthusiasts failed to register that migration wasn't just an issue for unrepentant, bigoted neo-Nazis.

It was an issue for ordinary people, too — many of them members of ethnic minorities — who had reasonable concerns about pressure on wages, housing and health.

 

Germany's problems can be summed up as the Three Ms: Migration, Money and Merkel, writes Mark Almond. She is pictured looking exhausted after negotiations broke down yesterday 

German wages are held down by the inflow of cheap labour, so it is hardly surprising that the most depressed parts of the country, especially the old East Germany, deserted Mrs Merkel's party and voted so strongly for the far-Right nationalist Alternative for Germany (AfD) or the ex-Communist Left Party in September.

Of course, Brussels tried to help Angela Merkel by dictating quotas for migrant re-settlement from Germany to neighbouring EU states. 

But in the last few weeks we have seen what Austrian and Czech voters thought of that, backing anti-Europe, anti-immigration parties.

 

In 2016, the Chancellor (pictured) reversed her policy on immigration overnight to welcome in more than a million asylum-seekers from the Muslim world. It was a widely unpopular move and unsettling for many Germans, writes Mark Almond

It is, however, cash that cuts to the quick of German doubts about the EU's future and its place in it.

With Britain leaving the EU, the German taxpayer was obviously going to be asked to pick up much of our tab. 

They saw what was coming and didn't like it, voting for parties such as the AfD that vociferously objected to paying more into the EU or carrying on bailing out the Euro's lame-ducks.

In her search for coalition partners, Mrs Merkel's overtures to the anti-business Greens, who wanted to push up energy costs for Germany's car industry and other exporting firms, proved the final straw for her usual supporters.

Disease. 

It is no coincidence that this weekend, influential German business leaders launched a campaign called New Deal For Britain to keep Britain in the EU, lobbying for concessions, especially on immigration.

I doubt if Brussels will listen and make the UK an offer it can't refuse. But we should not heed the siren voices saying that Mrs Merkel's difficulties will make Brexit more complicated.

The reality is that Germany's political crisis is a symptom of the disease at the heart of the EU. Across Europe, voters are registering their discontent with the status quo.

Even France's new president, Emmanuel Macron, was elected as an outsider, crushing established parties of Left and Right.

Well before the end of March 2019, the incorrigible complacency of the Brussels establishment could spur a lethal crack across the edifice of EU.

What Britain must do now is make the most of the opportunity presented by the mess that Mrs Merkel finds herself in — to seize the initiative and fulfil what every person who voted for Brexit wanted.

THAT IS A COUNTRY THAT DETERMINES ITS OWN FATE.

 

German Chancellor Angela Merkel has failed to reach an agreement with the Free Democrat Party and the German Greens. Her Christian Democrat Union alliance with the Christian Social Union is trying to reach out to the other two parties to make a four-party coalition. She is pictured with Volker Kauder, leader of CDU/CSU faction 

Paralysis

Waiting for the European elite to offer a good deal is like waiting for Godot with a taxi-meter running. 

There is, I believe, every chance that business sense will predominate — as we are already seeing with the New Deal For Britain.

German carmakers and a host of others know that good trade relations benefit both sides. 

Brussels might want to punish the UK but BMW still wants to make money out of us and with us.

By emphasising a pro-growth agenda, Britain can rally Europeans to accepting a mutually beneficial Brexit. 

 

Chairman of the Free Democrat Party Christian Lindner (pictured) is concerned what Green Party plans to end coal use would do the country's economy. He also wants a cap on the number of refugees allowed into Germany, something Merkel has been battling with 

But that also means making it clear that this country has a strategy to get on with making our people wealthier come what may — cliff-face or not.

The ups-and-downs of the exchange rate will matter much less than giving incentives to our people and companies to get on with the job of making the future work.

Britain needs to set out its own agenda, fitting in EU rules where they make sense and scrapping them if not. 

Paralysis in Europe should stimulate action here, not a damaging wait-and-see attitude.

Ironically, a Britain that gets moving on Brexit could spark much-needed reform across the EU and so get it working for its citizens and companies, and no longer just for the bureaucrats of Brussels.

Full article


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-5102319/Why-Angela-Merkel-s-humiliation-Brexit-boost-need.html#ixzz4zAtW46kP
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

 

*  *  *

[AS WE HAVE STATED ON SO MANY OCCASIONS OVER THE PAST  DECADES THE LOSS OF THE UK CONTRIBUTION AMONGST OTHER LATER MATTERS SUCH AS MASS  IMMIGRATION AND FEARS OF A SUPER-STATE WILL HAVE BROUGHT FORWARD THE EARLY DEMISE OF THE MONSTROUS UNDEMOCRATIC-COLLECTIVIST AND GODLESS BEAST OF BRUSSELS.

 THE CALL FOR FREEDOM HAS FINALLY ARISEN FROM THE GRASS-ROOTS PEOPLE OF EUROPE AND IT IS GROWING BY THE DAY-NOTHING CAN STOP IT!  FREEDOM IS THE NATURAL ASPIRATION OF MANKIND AND IT WILL RETURN TO OVERTHROW TYRANNY, WHEREVER IT MAY BE  - AS LONG AS IT TAKES!-THERE CAN BE NO SURRENDER!]

[COMMENTS IN BRACKETS ARE OURS!]

NOVEMBER 21-2017

 

H.F.1389

 

 

Lets return to our old values, says, Rees-Mogg.

BY Jason Groves-Political Editor-Daily Mail -Monday, January 8,2018

 

 

THERESA May must return to Tory values of individual choice and free trade, Jacob Rees-Mogg has warned.

He fears the Conservatives will lose further ground to Jeremy Corbyn unless the Prime Minister goes back to

'First Principles'.

The prominent Brexiteer is tipped by some as a future Tory leader, although he is not expected to be given a ministerial position in Mrs May's reshuffle.

Mr Rees-Mogg also warned that the poor relationship between Mrs May and Chancellor Philip Hammond is hampering government.

And he encouraged ministers to embrace

BREXIT,

saying that the government had been 'too timid'. Writing in the Sun, Rees Mogg urged the PM to put clear blue water between the Tories and Labour by highlighting the fundamental 'dividing lines' between the two parties.

'Tories want to help people to ,lead lives they want and to remove as many obstacies as possible,' he said.

'The socialist aims to cajole people into leading lives that are "good" for them. Tories are more realistic about human nature and generally more pragmatic.

Some Eurosceptics have privately urged Mrs May to sack her Chancellor into today's reshuffle to prevent him watering down Brexit.

Mr Rees-Mogg said: 'The whole government machine ought to be directed towards the benefit of Brexit and not the timorous efforts of managing decline, a recipe for failure popular with too many post-war British politicians.'

'In this regard, it is essential that the PM and Chancellor improve their working relationship and advocate the same policies. No government works when these two figures are not united.'

Mr Ress-Mogg said Brexit could bring huge benefits, including cheaper prices and real control over Britain's future. But he added: 'Here the Government has been too timid. It is as if it were carrying out a policy reluctantly- one foist upon it by the electorate, not one it really and enthusiastically wants.'

[And the past events or more precisely non-events since the referendum have confirmed this analysis.]

 

 

 

This isn't the Britain we fought for,' say the 'unknown warriors' of WWII
 


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1229643/This-isnt-Britain-fought-say-unknown-warriors-WWII.html#ixzz53txyBNPw
Follow us:
@MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

[COMMENTS IN BRACKETS ARE OURS!]

January 8,2018

H.F.1435

Library books saying it's OK to beat your wife if she refuses sex are among misogynistic material found in Islamic schools across Britain

  • Ofsted has put together a file of the worst examples of discrimination and sexism its inspectors found in schools

  • Among the books they found was one titled 'women who deserve to go hell'

  • One school Ofsted visited encouraged children to read a text that contrasted the 'noble women of the East' with the 'internally torn woman of the West'

  • The findings comes as Muslims girls wearing the hijab in primary schools will be quizzed as to why by inspectors 

 

Amanda Spielman, the chief inspector, has said she wants to ensure that children at religious schools are prepared for 'life in modern Britain'

Library books claiming hell is mostly full of women because they are 'ungrateful to their husbands' have been found in Islamic schools, it has emerged.

Ofsted has put together a file of the worst examples of discrimination and sexism its inspectors found in schools.

Among the library books they found was one titled 'women who deserve to go hell' which claimed it was wrong for wives to show 'ingratitude to their husband' or have 'tall ambitions'. 

And it advises pupils: 'In the beginning of the 20th century, a movement for the freedom of women was launched with the basic objective of driving women towards aberrant ways.'

The book was written by Egyptian preacher Mansoor Abdul Hakim.  

Other books said in a Muslim marriage 'the wife is not allowed to refuse sex to her husband' or 'leave the house where she lives without his permission' while boys and girls were taught the 'man by way of correction can also beat her'. 

One school Ofsted visited encouraged children to read a text that contrasted the 'noble women of the East' with the 'internally torn woman of the West'.

It claimed western women attract men and hang around aimlessly in cinemas and cafés. 

The materials came from state-funded schools as well as private faith schools and those running illegally as under-the-radar madrassas without registering with the government.

Inspectors also claimed teachers said that women had a responsibility 'only to bear children and bring them up as Muslims', The Times reported. 

In a box entitled 'daily life and relationships', a pupil had written that men are 'physically stronger' and women are 'emotionally weaker'.

The worksheet was covered in approving red ticks from the teacher. 

Ofsted insiders said the discovery of the books made for 'uncomfortable reading'.  

There are 177 Muslim schools in England, of which 148 are independent, and the rest state-funded.

The Department for Education has been contacted for comment. 

The findings comes as Muslims girls wearing the hijab in primary schools will be quizzed as to why by inspectors.

 
 

The findings by Ofsted comes as Muslims girls wearing the hijab in primary schools will be quizzed as to why by inspectors (file picture)

Head of Ofsted Amanda Spielman said creating an environment where Muslim children are expected to wear the headscarf 'could be interpreted as sexualisation of young girls'.   

It comes after it was revealed a fifth of 800 primary schools now list the headscarf in their uniform policy.

This is despite the fact a hijab is usually only worn by young women after puberty and in front of men for modesty reasons - not by primary school children.

Campaigners have said it should be 'fiercely resisted' and claimed it could 'sexualise' young children. 

Aisha Ali-Khan, a Muslim feminist campaigner and a teacher for 13 years, told MailOnline: 'The hijab should be banned from primary schools but local authorities are afraid of causing offence to the Muslim community and afraid of being branded as racist.

'A headscarf or hijab, is usually worn by girls who have reached puberty, to prevent unwanted sexual advances from men.

'How can a four or five year old child make an informed choice? It's not allowed in Islam so why is it being allowed in schools? You should only do something if you want to and understand the concept behind it.

'But the local authorities are too scared to go back and our government has allowed this to be part of the school policy and that's wrong. They are allowing decisions to be made by schools and local authorities which is worrying and they are trying to wash their hands of all responsibility.'

Gina Khan, a children's rights campaigner in Birmingham, added: 'Schools are allowing it because they are afraid of being called Islamophobic and they have been told that this is a religious garment - but they need to support Muslim girls to have free choices, not to be set apart from other children.' 

But the Muslim Council of Britain said Ofsted's policy was 'deeply worrying'.

Secretary general Harun Khan said: 'It is deeply worrying that Ofsted has announced it will be specifically targeting and quizzing young Muslim girls who choose to wear the headscarf.

'It sends a clear message to all British women who adopt this that they are second-class citizens, that while they are free to wear the headscarf, the establishment would prefer that they do not.'

He added that many British Muslims who wear the headscarf have done 'extremely well' in education.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5125623/Books-saying-OK-beat-wife-Islamic-schools.html#ixzz500TscQny
Follow us:
@MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
 

NOVEMBER 28,2016

 

H.F.1398-A SETTLED KINGDOM.(?)

 
 

[AT LONG! LONG! LAST!

- WE LEAVE

THE

CORRUPT-COLLECTIVIST-UNDEMOCRATIC-GODLESS EU

 IN MARCH 2019.]

*

DAILY MAIL

-At last, Hammond's on board with

BREXIT

and the

REMOANERS are DEAD and BURIED

LEAVING THE EU

 IN

MARCH,2019

 

 

THE

DOMINIC

LAWSON

Column

 

 

Finally, it’s sorted. Until yesterday, the anti-Brexiteers known as Remoaners had high hopes of Philip Hammond, the Chancellor.

But yesterday he appeared as joint author of a newspaper article with the most adamantine Brexiteer in the Cabinet, the International Trade Secretary Dr Liam Fox. The two supposed foes declared that in March 2019, Britain would not just be leaving the EU but also ‘we will leave the Customs Union and be free to negotiate the best trade deals around the world as an independent, open, trading nation’.

Although the Cabinet Brexiteers were content with Hammond’s proposal that there should be a transition period after March 2019, pending a final settlement of the country’s arrangements with the EU, the Chancellor had given the impression he was bending to the demands of the CBI that Britain remain within the Customs Union during that unspecified period.

Blunder

This they regarded as a fatal blunder — and not just because they suspected the CBI (which had campaigned for Britain to give up sterling for the euro) of seeking to keep the UK in the EU ‘by the back door’.

As Shanker Singham, chairman of the special trade commission of the Legatum Institute (a group consulted regularly by the Government), warned last week: ‘The UK must be able to provide the clarity of being outside the Customs Union on Day 1 of Brexit.

If such clarity does not exist, then other countries will not think the UK is serious about executing an independent trade policy and they will quickly lose patience and move on.’...

...In any case, the nation has not changed its collective mind since the referendum in June 2016. If anything, views have hardened in the direction set by the result. A survey of 3,293 people published on Friday by the London School of Economics showed that even those who had voted ‘Remain’ would prefer the sort of Brexit deal the LSE’s team described as ‘hard’.

A total of 51.3 per cent of Remain voters backed a Brexit deal which delivered ‘full control’ over immigration and led to lower numbers of migrants from the EU. No fewer than 54.7 per cent of Remainers said that the UK should ‘pay nothing’ to the EU by means of a ‘divorce bill’.

And 52.2 per cent of Remainers told the LSE researchers that we should entirely free British law from the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice. Unsurprisingly, a still higher proportion of self-identifying ‘Leave’ voters supported what the LSE termed

His statement on The Andrew Marr Show last month that failure to reach an amicable deal with the EU ‘would be a very, very bad outcome for Britain’ was seen as an attack on his Brexiteer colleagues in the Cabinet (and, indeed, on the Prime Minister).

hard Brexit’.

Monstrous

This clearly disappointed the most voluble critic of the Brexiteers on the Tory parliamentary benches, Anna Soubry. In her own newspaper article yesterday, she lamented ‘a sense of resignation among most people who voted Remain that we have to “man up” and make the most of what we know will be a rotten Brexit’...

Full article


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4787508/At-Hammond-s-board-Brexit.html#ixzz4pkbL1fqi
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

*

[14 MONTHS

TO REGAIN OUR ONCE FREE INDEPENDENT NATION STATE OF ENGLAND.]

[COMMENTS IN BRACKETS ARE OURS!]

AUGUST 14, 2017

H.F.1281 BREXIT SOONER THAN LATER!

 
 

 

[IT HAD TO HAPPEN!

-'WE ARE AFTER ALL AN INSULAR  ISLAND PEOPLE']

 

*

 

Even Remainers now back a

'hard' Brexit:

 Most Brits ... - Daily Mail

 

. Even Remainers now back a 'hard' Brexit: Most Brits want to regain full control ...
By Claire Ellicott for the Daily Mail and Kate Ferguson For Mailonline ... a straight
choice between that and no deal, with 58 per cent backing it.

 

Most Brits want to regain full control of our borders and to become free of meddling EU judges, survey reveals

  • Most polled want the UK to become free of EU judges and full border control 

  • Two thirds said they would prefer 'no deal' rather than a soft Brexit, poll found

  • Findings boost for Theresa May who says no deal is better than a bad deal

Most Remain voters now back a Brexit that gives Britain a clean break from the EU and control back of our borders, a major study has found.

Many of those who voted to stay in the European Union also now believe the country should only pay a small ‘divorce bill’ and stop EU judges ruling over the UK.

The results are a major boost for Theresa May’s Brexit stategy - and suggest diehard Remainers, such as Liberal Democrat leader Sir Vince Cable and former prime minister Tony Blair, have overestimated support for backtracking on Brexit. 

Full artical


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4782712/Most-Brits-hard-Brexit-new-survey-finds.html#ixzz4pXWhGZDU
Follow us:
@MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

*

 

 FREEDOM!

 

.'..We cannot, I fear, falsify the pedigree of the fierce people, and persuade them that they are not sprung from a nation in whose veins the blood of freedom circulates.  The language in which they would hear you tell them this tale would detect the imposition; your speech would betray you

'An Englishman is the unfittest person on earth, to argue another Englishman into slavery'.

*

EDMUND BURKE

 

Conciliation with America-speech House of Commons

March 22,1775

 

*

1+2+3

+4+5+6+7+8+9+10

Soul of England

 

 

[COMMENTS IN BRACKETS AND CAPS ARE OURS]

 

AUGUST 12-2017

H.F.1277 BREXIT SOONER THAN LATER!

 

PART-1-2-3-4-5-6-7-June-1994-EDP-Official Website-2016-June-PART-8-9-10-11-12 -13-14

BREXIT

BUT NOT OUT OF THE EU FOR 2/3 YEARS. IT IS A TRAVESTY OF JUSTICE. ALL EU TREATIES WERE OBTAINED BY BRIBERY AND TREASON  AND FRAUD WHICH

UNDER THE 1969 VIENNA CONVENTION ON TREATIES MAKES THEM.

NULL AND VOID.

JULY 23-FREEDOM NOW-2016

JULY 23-FREEDOM NOW-PART 1-2016

JULY 23 FREEDOM NOW-PART 2-2016

JULY 30-2016

*

AUGUST 23-FREEDOM NOW-2016AUGUST 23-FREEDOM NOW-PART 1-2016

SEPTEMBER 23 FREEDOM NOW PART 1-2016SEPTEMBER 23 FREEDOM NOW-2016

OCTOBER 23-BREXIT NOW-2016

NOVEMBER 23-BREXIT NOW-2016

DECEMBER 23-BREXIT NOW-2016

*

H.F.200A-FREEDOM NOW

 

PLEASE  NOTE: WE HAVE IN ADVANCE GIVEN BELOW THE BULLETIN FOR EACH MONTH FOR THE NEXT 30 MONTHS WHICH YOU CAN ENTER-IT WILL CONTAIN INFORMATION FROM OTHER MONTHS FROM THE PAST AND THAT AVAILABLE AT THE SPECIFIED TIME.  WE ARE MAKING THIS ARRANGEMENT AS WE ARE UNABLE TO GIVE AN EXIT DATE FROM THE EU. AS YOU ARE AWARE WE COMMENCED OUR BULLETIN FILE IN OCTOBER 2003 FOR THE PURPOSE OF MAKING AVAILABLE INFORMATION WHICH WOULD BRING THE EXIT FROM THE EU AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. BUT NOW THAT BREXIT IS SOON TO BE ENACTED BY PARLIAMENT THE DAY OF OUR DELIVERANCE WILL SOON BE AT HAND AND THE RETURN OF OUR INDEPENDENT NATION STATE OF ENGLAND TOGETHER WITH OUR NEIGHBOURING NATION STATES OF WALES-SCOTLAND AND NORTHERN ISLAND.

MAY GOD GRANT US A SPEEDY EXIT FROM THE SOVIETISED-COLLECTIVIST-UNDEMOCRATIC -MAMMOTH MONSTROSITY OF THE SO-CALLED EUROPEAN UNION.

 

MAR-17 APR-17 MAY-17 JUN-17 JUL-17 AUG-17 SEP-17 OCT-17 NOV-17 DEC-17
JAN-18 FEB-18 MAR-18

APL-18

MAY-18

JUN-18

JUL-18

AUG-18

SEP-18

OCT-18

NOV-18

DEC-18

JAN-19

FEB-19

MAR-19

APR-19

MAY-19

JUN-19

JUL-19

AUG-19

 

FEBRUARY-2016

 

 

The English People's

VoicE

WELCOME!

WHERE'S THEIR SENSE OF DUTY?

 

NNot since WW2 has there been a greater need for politicians to pull together. Fat chance when they're so lacking in PUBLIC SPIRIT says

Daily Mail: 2017-07-11 - WHERE'S THEIR SENSE OF DUTY?

 

 

WHATEVER you think of our vote to leave the EU there is no doubt that we face some of the most critical months in our nation's modern history.

Most observers, whether Leavers or Remainers, agree that extricating ourselves from

BRUSSELS

and charting a newly

INDEPENDENT COURSE

will be

A COLOSSAL CHALLENGE,

YOU MAY HAVE  HOPED, THEREFORE , THAT OUR NATION'S POLITICIANS WOULD HAVE RISEN TO THE MOMENT, PUTTING ASIDE PETTY DIFFERENCES AND COMING TOGETHER IN THE

NATIONAL INTEREST.

What better sign that we are all

PATRIOTS.

and that, like our forefathers,

WE STAND OR FALL AS ONE

UNITED KINGDOM?...

 

 

Bickering

 Then , after Mrs May invited rival parties yesterday to 'come forward with your own views and ideas about how we can tackle these challenges as a country', the Labour leadership reacted with precisely the seriousness and maturity we have come to expect from Mr Corbyn and his cronies-which is to say, none at all...

Patriot

Under Jeremy Corbyn, meanwhile, the Labour Party has given itself over completely to an increasingly strident politics of moral posturing, its litany of hysterical complaints leavened only with the ruinously expensive bribery of voters too young to remember the

CHAOS OF THE SEVENTIES

It says a great deal about the historical illiteracy of Mr Corbyn's supporters that they like to present their hero as Clement Attlee's heir. In fact, they could not be more different.

Attlee

was above all a

PATRIOT,

a man who put country ahead of party. He would have regarded Mr Corbyn and his allies with with

UTTER CONTEMPT.

Like so many men of his generation, Atlee had worn his country's uniform and seen action at first hand, in his case, on the hellish desert front of Mesopotamia in World War I.

And like Churchill, his great rival and colleague, he knew national solidarity meant far more than petty partisanship.

  But there was something even deeper than the shared

SACRIFICE OF WAR

Neither MacDonald nor Baldwin had seen action, but both saw POLITICS as a kind of

NATIONAL SERVICE.

They had grown up in an era when collective duty meant more than

 INDIVIDUAL AMBITION

and when there was no greater honour than to devote yourself to

KING AND COUNTRY.

One anecdote says it all.

In 1921, horrified at the huge rise in Britain's debt during the World War I, Baldwin secretly donated a fifth of his fortune-a staggering £150,000, worth £6  million today-to the Treasury.

He wrote a letter anonymously to The Times, appealing to the wealthy classes

to tax themselves  and help reduce the

WAR DEBT

saying he wanted to show

' love of country than love of money'

he volunteered 20% of the value of his estate. It was only many years  later that the correspondent was identified as Baldwin.

 

*

Sneer

And he took that attitude into Westminster. Love of country mattered more than love of office, the lust for power or even the ties of party.

Could you imagine many of today's politicians doing that? Can you imagine, say ,George Osborne, donating his inherited wallpaper millions to pay  towards our crippling annual deficit? No, me neither.

The irony is that almost the only modern frontline politician with Baldwin's sense of duty is our Prime Minister. And it says a great deal about our times that Mrs May's reticence and quiet decency are treated as handicaps, when previous generations would have seen them as virtues.

Not even Mrs May's greatest admirers would claim her past few months have been a triumph, and her time in Downing Street may now be numbered in weeks rather than years. Even so, I suspect history books will be kinder to the Prime Minister than the snobs, pygmies and hypocrites who love to sneer at her.

The tragedy, however, is that Britain is drifting towards a shambolic exit from the EU and a wretched beginning to our new journey as a

INDEPENDENT TRADING NATION.

Not since World War II has there been greater cause for our politicians to pull together an the

NATIONAL INTEREST.

The tragedy is that never in living memory have they fallen so depressingly short of the standards we deserve.

[COUNTRY BEFORE PARTY

UNITY INSTEAD OF CHAOS]

DECISION

Once in every man and nation comes the moment to decide'

In the strife of Truth with Falsehood for the good or evil side.

J. R. LOWELL, The present crisis.

*

OPPORTUNITY

There is a tide in the affairs of men

Which, taken at the flood, leads on to fortune;

Omitted, all the voyage of their life

Is bound in shallows and in miseries.

SHAKESPEARE.

*

FREEDOM

All we have of freedom-all we use and know-

This our fathers bought for us, long long ago.

KIPLING

*

ENGLAND

All our past proclaims our future; Shakespeare's voice and Nelson's hand

Milton's faith and Wordsworth's trust in this our chosen and [soon] chainless land.

Bear us witness; come the world against her,

England yet shall stand.

SWINBURNE . England.

[COMMENTS IN BRACKETS ARE OURS!]

 

 

TO BE CONTINUED

JULY 11-2017

 

 

 

H.F.1252 BREXIT SOONER THAN LATER!

IMMIGRATION FILE

E U FILE

IRAQ/AFGHAN WAR

     9/11 AN INSIDE JOB

MAGNA CARTA

LONDON 7/7-AN INSIDE JOB

NAZI DVD

ENGLAND FILE

CRIMINAL EU

THE SPIRIT OF ENGLAND

SAY NO TO EU

UNDERSTANDING EASTER

EURO MUST FAIL

ROTTEN HEART OF EU

SOUL OF ENGLAND

100 REASONS TO LEAVE EU

TREASON A CONSTITUTIONAL ANALYSIS

ALFRED - KING OF THE ENGLISH

THE END OF THE ENGLISH

ENGLAND OUR ENGLAND

MOST EVERYTHING WHICH IS PRECIOUS IN OUR CIVILISATION HAS COME FROM SMALL INDEPENDENT NATION STATES

 by LORD PETER SHORE.

 

A NATION STATE HAS BEEN REBORN

 

ON the momentous day Theresa May said Britain WILL quit the single market, she put Cameron's feeble negotiations to shame with an ultimatum to Brussels that the UK will 'walk away from a bad deal-and make the EU pay' 

  • STEEL OF THE NEW
  • IRON LADY
  • The PM is hopeful of an EU-UK trade deal because of mutual economic interests 
  • She said Europe not making a deal with BritAIN would be 'calamitous self-harm'
  • It was confirmed that we will be leaving the single market and customs union
  • But the EU's chief negotiator called her show of defiance counter-productive
  • Her speech was criticised by the Lib Dems as Labour fought on how to respond 
  • Sterling rose 2.8 per cent against the Dollar and 1.8 per cent against the Euro


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4130034/Theresa-s-Brexit-speech-puts-Cameron-shame.html#ixzz4W7pxZPm9
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

PressReader - Daily Mail: 2017-01-18 - Europe split over May's ...

https://www.pressreader.com/uk/daily-mail/20170118/281625305003771
Europe split over May's vision – but even Tusk calls it 'realistic'. Daily ... News -
From Mario Ledwith in Brussels and John Stevens in London.

 

*

POINT BY POINT, HER BLUEPRINT TO FREE BRITAIN FROM BRUSSELS
THERESA May delighted Eurosceptics yesterday with an ambitious road map for BREXIT. The PM extended the hand of friendship to the EU but threatened to walk away if BRUSSELS tried to impose a punitive deal. Jack DOYLE sets out her 12 objectives and analyses her chances of success.

1. CERTAINTY

 WHAT SHE SAID

We will provide certainty where we can. The same rules and laws will apply on the day after BREXIT, as they did before. And the Government will put the final deal to a vote in both houses of Parliament.

CAN SHE DELIVER

By keeping in place-at least initially-all EU laws, Mrs May will provide a degree of continuity and confidence for business. However, as she freely admits she cannot control the outcome of the negotiations. Parliament is highly likely to approve any deal because the alternative will be a chaotic BREXIT.

DEAL OR NO DEAL 3/5

*

2. OUR OWN LAWS

 WHAT SHE SAID

We will take back control of our laws and bring an end to the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice in Britain. Because we will not truly left the EU if we are not in control of our own laws

CAN SHE DELIVER

 Adopting the 'take back control' slogan of the Leave campaign, Mrs May repeated her promise to end rule by EU rule and judges in Luxembourg and restore power to Parliament and domestic courts. Without this there is no Brexit. A firm red line

DEAL OR NO DEAL 5/5

*

3 A UNITED KINGDOM

 WHAT SHE SAID

A stronger Britain demands that we strengthen the precious union between the four nations of the UK.

CAN SHE DELIVER

By consulting devolved administrations, Mrs May is seeking to reassure voters in the nations of the UK which didn't vote for Brexit that she is listening to their concerns, and avoid Nicola Sturgeon calling for a second independence vote.

DEAL OR NO DEAL 3/5

*

4. THE IRISH BORDER

 WHAT SHE SAID

WE will work to deliver a practical solution that allows the maintenance of the Common Travel Area with the Republic, while protecting the integrity of the United Kingdom's immigration system.

CAN SHE DELIVER

Both countries want to maintain the open border between Northern Ireland and the Republic without opening a back door into Britain. Likely to mean UK border checks at Irish ports and airports.

DEAL OR NO DEAL 3/5

*

5. CONTROL OF IMMIGRATION

 WHAT SHE SAID

The message from the public before and during the referendum campaign was clear: BREXIT must mean control of the number of people who come to Britain from Europe. And that is what we will deliver

CAN SHE DELIVER

Ending free movement is a  RED LINE, but Mrs May left open when it will end, what system will replace it and details of any transition deal. The PM wants highly skilled EU migrants, doctors and nurses, but will she compromise on unskilled migrants to get a better trade deal

DEAL OR NO DEAL 5/5

*

 6.  EU NATIONALS AND BRITISH EXPATS

 

WHAT SHE SAID

We  want to guarantee the right of EU citizens who are already living here in Britain, and the rights of British nationals in other member states, as early as we can.

CAN SHE DELIVER

Likely to agreed early on, as long as the EU doesn't want to haggle. Last year Mrs May offered to settle on the rights of three million EU nationals in the UK, and 1.2million Brits on the continent in advance of formals talks- but Angela Merkel refused.

DEAL OR NO DEAL 5/5

*
7.WORKER'S RIGHTS

 WHAT SHE SAID

Not only will the government protect the rights of workers' set out in European legislation, we will build on them.

CAN SHE DELIVER

Mrs May is determined to at least preserve protections for workers on low and middle incomes-many of whom voted for BREXIT. Could come under threat if there is no deal., and Britain slashes taxes and regulation to attract business.

DEAL OR NO DEAL? 3/5

*

8. TRADE WITH EUROPE

WHAT SHE SAID

As a priority, we will pursue a bold and ambitious free trade agreement with the EU. This should allow for the freest possible trade in goods and services. But I want to make it clear. It cannot mean membership of the single market

CAN SHE DELIVER

The crux of the negotiation. Britain will leave the single market, and with it EU laws and free movement. Instead Mrs May wants a tariff-free trade and customs agreement to stop goods being held up at ports. She ruled out ' vast contributions' to the EU budget, and the only money going to Brussels will be for particular programmes and agencies like Europol. Her huge gamble is to threaten to walk away if the EU attempts to punish Britain

DEAL OR NO DEAL 3/5

*

9. GLOBAL TRADE

 WHAT SHE SAID

A global Britain must be free to strike trade agreements with countries outside the EU too. But I also want tariff-free trade with Europe and cross-border trade there to be as frictionless as possible.

CAN SHE DELIVER

Mrs May wants deals with non-EU countries including the US. That would be impossible from inside the customs union, which imposes a uniform tariff on all non-EU countries. It would also make trade Secretary Liam Fox's job redundant.

DEAL OR NO DEAL 4/5

*

10. SCIENCE AND INNOVATION

 WHAT SHE SAID

WE have a proud history of leading and supporting cutting -edge research and innovation. So we will also welcome agreement to continue to collaborate with our European partners on major science, research, and technology initiatives.

CAN SHE DELIVER

Unlikely to be an obstacle to any deal. Much collaboration between academics takes place outside formal EU structures and will continue unimpeded.

DEAL OR NO DEAL 5/5

*

11. CRIME AND TERRORISM

 WHAT SHE SAID

All of us in Europe face the challenge of cross-border crime, a deadly terrorist threat, and the dangers presented by hostile states.  All of us share interests and values in common, values we want to see projected around the world.

CAN SHE DELIVER

Security and intelligence cooperation and defence cooperation cannot be a formal bargaining chip, but without making it one, Mrs May reminds EU allies of Britain's importance as an ally in fighting terrorism and important status as a military power.

DEAL OR NO DEAL 5/5

*

12.  A SMOOTH EXIT

 WHAT SHE SAID

It is in no one's interests for there to be a cliff-edge for business or a threat to stability as we change from our existing relationship to a new partnership with the European Union.

CAN SHE DELIVER

Mrs May wants tranitional arrangements to smooth the process of leaving the EU with specific deals on budget contributions, immigration, trade and customs lasting different periods of time. Securing this as well as securing a final deal within two years is a huge task.

DEAL OR NO DEAL 3/5

*

[THERE IS EVERY LIKELIHOOD THAT OTHER EU MEMBER STATES WILL BE GREATLY ENCOURAGED BY BREXIT TO LEAVE THAT SOVIETISED-COLLECTIVIST-UNDEMOCRATIC SO-CALLED EUROPEAN UNION IN THE NEXT FEW YEARS WHICH SHOULD MAKE A NUMBER OF EU STATES TO CO-OPERATE FULLY WITH THE UK OR FACE THE CONSEQUENCES OF THEIR UNFRIENDLY ATTITUDE AT A LATER DATE.

AS THE GREAT PRIME MINISTER - WILLIAM PITT -  (1759-1806) ANNOUNCED IN NOVEMBER 9-1805 SHORTLY AFTER  NELSON'S VICTORY OVER THE FRENCH AND SPANISH FLEETS AT TRAFALGAR.

'England has saved herself by her exertions; and will, as I trust, save Europe by her example.'

The blueprint of a Free and Prosperous United Kingdom should be the blueprint of a future Free Europe and the world at large. Our past still lives in the hearts of FREE PEOPLES everywhere and soon we will rejoin that sacred past which we left over 43 years ago because of traitorous politicians and others who couldn't see the dangers ,for the gross lies and deceit in their path.

WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 18-2017

H.F.1092 BREXIT NOW

 

 DAILY MAIL

COMMENT

FEBRUARY 2, 2017

 

AT LAST, IT IS ALL CLEAR FOR

 BREXIT'S

LIFT-OFF

 

YESTERDAY  was a HISTORIC DAY for OUR COUNTRY. BY a RESOUNDING MAJORITY of 384, the COMMONS swept away [our  past 45 years of tutelage within an undemocratic-unaccountable-unbearable-corrupt-expensive- strait-jacket Europe.]

 

THIS was a historic day for our country. At 7.30pm yesterday by a resounding majority of 384, the Commons swept away the last serious obstacle to freeing Britain from the chains that have bound us to an unelected, unaccountable Brussels for 45 YEARS.

True, we can still expect dirty tricks from the 114 who, to their shame, voted  against implementing the

PEOPLE'S WILL.

Of these , this newspaper will not waste ink on cursing SNP members, whose fantasies of SCOTLAND as an independent EU nation state gave them a spurious excuse for defying the UK majority.

AS for the rest, no criticism is too harsh for those Labour MPs who represent solidly Brexiteer constituencies, but voted to

REMAIN.

They deserve everything coming to them at the next election.

So, too, do the creeps who in 2015 backed the call for a binding referendum, but voted last night against implementing its result.

Among these, none can beat the monstrous hypocrisy of

NICK CLEGG

-that flip-flopping representative of the moneyed elite, suckled on the [thirsty] breast of Brussels.

IN 2008, it was he who led demands for an in/out referendum on Europe (as we demonstrate on the opposite page-

[COMMENTS IN BRACKETS ARE OURS!]

H F 1101-AT LONG LAST-FREEDOM AWAITS! 

 

Weekly Geo-Political News and Analysis

by Benjamin Fulford

 

East-West lines drawn—will it be make love instead of make war?

It is looking more likely now that we will see a world government rather than a world war in the coming months and years based on what is happening around the world.

First of all, a year after the World Forum at Davos featured Chinese President Xi Jinping as its star, this year Western leaders gathered at Davos in force with U.S. President Donald Trump as the top attraction.  What’s interesting is that this year’s Western-dominated Davos theme, “Creating a shared future in a fractured world,” is very similar to China’s theme of “Building a community with a shared future for mankind.”

Of course, the Chinese and Americans are still duking it out over who will be in charge of this “shared future.”

Pentagon sources this week were gushing over the top about Trump and his Davos performance, noting, “Trump rocked Davos, with globalist CEOs from EU multinationals promising to invest and create jobs in America.”  They added that “With the cabal defeated and unable to stage any more false-flags or start World War 3, Davos established the Trump world order and may have launched the global currency reset.”

Even more alarming, though, was the Pentagon source’s assessment that “a cabal underwater base off Alaska may have been nuked as the military rally behind Trump, who has been promoted from POTUS to GEOTUS (God Emperor of the U.S.).”

The Chinese, for their part, had the following to say about Trump at Davos via their official Xinhua News Agency:  “The United States is like the boxer who vows to obey the rules when dominating the fight, but claims the rules must be changed when he is losing.”
http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/2018-01/28/c_136931719.htm

The U.S. military government under Trump was able to buy time for itself last week by threatening “immediate arrests” of Democratic Party politicians, who “caved in to end the U.S. government shutdown in less than 72 hours,” Pentagon sources note.  The sinking of an Iranian oil tanker off the shore of Shanghai also postponed the start of the gold-backed petro-yuan as a replacement for the U.S. petro-dollar.  However, as things stand, the still-bankrupt current U.S. regime has only bought time until February 8th.

It is clear that the United States, the most indebted nation in world history, is untenable and needs a complete reboot of the current world system in order to survive.  The Chinese, for their part, are the biggest beneficiaries of the current system and would like it to continue to evolve in their favour, as it has been doing for years.

What to do about this situation will be the topic of high-level talks this in Asia this week on the day of the January 31st Super Blue Blood Moon between representatives of the White Dragon Society (WDS) and representatives of the 13 bloodline families who control the current system.

The WDS will be proposing a…
 

The remainder of this article is only available to members of BenjaminFulford.net
Please Log In or Register to create an account.

 

ET technologies: Benefits for all humanity

Hello Ben:

A man has recently come forward with much information to impart to the people of the world.  Of course, some of it is what you and others have also been speaking of for some time now.  He sounds like he is involved at the coal face of getting this tech manufactured and out to the people and we thought it would be a very good idea to send this information on to you. He has requested the word go out to all people who are in a position to help make this technology happen quickly.   A couple of other blog members and myself thought it would be a good idea to forward this information on to you as we thought you were in a very good position to contact relevant people who could get involved or find out more of what is required and get the ball rolling.

Of course, it is also very possible you already know this man or at least know of him.   His name is Jared Rand and his contact email is:
weareonelightforall@gmail.com

Here is what another blog member has written, which will explain much to you.

Thank you for all you are doing;  it is so very much appreciated.  We are so close now to the changes occurring.  It is amazing to see how far we have come thanks to wonderful people such as yourself, Ben.

We all thought you were an obvious person to forward this info to, Ben.  We are not in a position to contact relevant individuals/organizations, but we know you have contacts who may be in the right fields for just this purpose.

We also appreciate just how busy you are, Ben, so hope you don’t mind us passing this on to you at this crucial moment in the takedown of the cabal.  We felt it was very important to pass this information along ASAP.

Thank you, Ben.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
ET technologies – Benefits For All Humanity
We forward this information to you in the hope you get a chance to look closer at it.  Benjamin, we see you as a man of great vision, with a good heart and an open mind.
https://www.freeconferencecallhd.com/wall/recorded_audio?audioRecordingUrl=https%3A%2F%2Frs2941.freeconferencecall.com%2Fstorage%2FsgetHD%2FaNHU8%2F98IQ&subscriptionId=2493443

This call, which took place on January 23, 2018, contains information concerning new “off-world” technologies, like “Med Beds” (which heal all illnesses, rejuvenate the body, grow new limbs, restore failing organs, support anti-aging, etc.)  Also, replicators (as seen in the Star Trek series). Of course, free energy machines are also in the mix of technology he mentions.  All are being offered to humanity by different benevolent ET races. However, these need to be produced and distributed by humanity, which is a huge undertaking.

At 13 :50 Jared Rand urges us to spread his words in order to come into contact with good-hearted people who are closely connected to the financial and military areas/professions.

To get this huge project up and running ASAP, they need financial, technical, and distribution support and funds to start production of this technology.  As soon as these products are manufactured, they will be available for the benefit of all humanity, with priority for the most needy.

Sincerely,
Three members of your wonderful blog

Catholic churches burned as mass protests greet Pope in Catholic Chile

This went right under the radar:  11 Catholic churches were burned as mass protests greeted the Pope in Catholic Chile.  A harbinger of things to come?

Dear Friends,

Please share these YouTube videos with your friends and twits :

Not everyone is happy the Pope is in Chile.

In Chile, pope met by protests, threats, burned churches

Church burned to the ground in Chile after Pope’s visit

Future of world being negotiated in next two weeks as Super Blue Blood Moon approaches

The shutdown of the U.S. government over the weekend is likely to become permanent as top-level negotiations continue to discuss its replacement, multiple sources agree.  The Western old-world-order leadership is gathering this week in Davos, Switzerland to debate this very issue, the sources say.

Pentagon sources, meanwhile, say “the shutdown was orchestrated so Congress can be arrested, as they lose immunity while not in session.”  In addition, the sources say U.S. President Donald Trump “was summoned to meet top brass at the Pentagon on January 18th, as the Navy hunted for rogue submarines and the military uses the shutdown to arrest cabal, terminate the corporate government, and launch the Republic to usher in the global currency reset (GCR).”

Furthermore, the sources continued, “The House may release the FISA memo, which will take down criminals in Department of Justice, the FBI, the Democratic National Council, the CIA, plus the Obama and Hillary Clinton organizations.”

“Trump may even read the memo at the State of the Union address on January 30th,” the sources added.

The sources also say, “Zimbabwe opposition leader Roy Bennett was killed in New Mexico to solidify the Zimbabwe dollar and pave the way for the GCR.”  A gold-backed Zimbabwe dollar is being pushed by many as a new African currency to replace the current mishmash of Rothschild-controlled currencies.

However, it is still far from certain that the GCR will take place as envisioned by the people in the Pentagon and agencies, since worldwide, the situation is extremely volatile and slipping out of U.S. control.

The most important factor to bear in mind is that the U.S. government is the most indebted government in the history of the planet and much of that debt is owed to China.  If the U.S. unilaterally reneged on the debt, it would no longer be able to control the U.S. dollar system that allows the Pentagon to operate around the planet.  The result would be that U.S. soldiers, who are already not receiving pay thanks to the government shutdown, being forced to beg on the streets or else rob people at gunpoint around the world.  As if to underline this situation, the Chinese rating agency Dagong downgraded the U.S. sovereign and local government debt to BBB+ with a negative outlook, putting it below Peru or Morocco.

Here is what they had to say about the U.S. debt:

“The perennial negative impact of the superstructure on the economic base has continued to deteriorate the debt repayment sources of the federal government, and this trend will be further exacerbated by the government’s massive tax cuts.  The increasing reliance on the debt-driven mode of economic development will continue to erode the solvency of the federal government.”

Dagong probably does not realize just how deep the problem runs.  The Pentagon, in its first-ever audit using outside auditors, has already found that $21 trillion went missing between 1998 and 2015.  That is more than 35 times the entire official U.S. military budget for 2016, multiple sources report.
https://www.sott.net/article/374124-pentagon

CIA, MI6, and Pentagon sources say the missing money was spent on…
 

The remainder of this article is only available to members of BenjaminFulford.net
Please Log In or Register to create an account.

 

 
LITTLEJOHN

 

Don't tell 'em Pike! RICHARD LITTLEJOHN says the 2021 census will be just another excuse by the Government to invade our privacy, fine and tax us more

The justification for having a census every ten years is that it furnishes the Government with valuable information to improve public services and plan for future demand.

That's the theory, anyway. The last one was held in 2011 and was the most extensive, intrusive ever. The census form ran to 32 pages, delving into the most intimate areas of our lives.

They even had the impertinence to ask about sexual preference, as if that's any of their damn business.

Next time they are determined to find out how many transsexuals there are. Failure to comply could land you with a fine of up to £1,000. But, we're told, it's for our own good.

 

The last census in 2011 was the most extensive ever with a form that ran to 32 pages and delving into the most intimate areas of our lives

The Government insists it must know everything about us in order to provide the 'world-class' public services which politicians are always boasting about.

So how's that working out, then? They've had seven years to sift through all the data from the 2011 census and react accordingly. But can anyone, hand on heart, honestly say that things have got better?

Are the roads and trains less crowded, as a result of ministers learning that more people would be travelling?

Is it easier to see your doctor? Have hospital waiting lists been slashed as more beds have been provided to cope with our growing, ageing population?

Can you get your children into the local school of your choice? Are there more coppers on the beat? Are your dustbins emptied more frequently?

Has the third runway at Heathrow been built yet? Have we opened a few more nuclear power stations to meet our insatiable demand for electricity, to power all the fancy gizmos we rely upon today?

Er, not exactly. Road space has actually been reduced, thanks to the faddish obsession with building cycle lanes. The NHS appears to be in permanent crisis, and it can take weeks to see a GP, that's if you can find one still registering new patients.

School places are under more pressure than ever, largely as a result of uncontrolled immigration. The police have withdrawn from the streets to concentrate on scouring the internet for 'hate crime'.

In some areas, you're lucky if you see the dustmen once every three weeks. No wonder fly-tipping is endemic. We'll put a man on Mars before the third runway at Heathrow opens. And it's only a matter of time until the iPhones will be going out all over Britain, as coal-fired power stations shut arbitrarily, to meet made-up 'climate change' targets, and we are forced to rely on useless windmills.

The 2021 census, will for the first time since the Domesday Book, pictured, ask for details about all our income, investments and other assets

One area where we do now lead the world is in snooping on and gathering irrelevant information about the population.

We'd like to know a little bit about you for our files.

Plans for the 2021 census have just been released and, next time, it won't be just the now-predictable demands for ethnicity, sexual predilection and gender identity.

For the first time since William the Conqueror's Domesday Book, in 1086, the Government is planning to gather details of all our income, investments and other assets. That early census was so thorough that it was said 'there was no single hide nor yard of land, nor indeed one ox or cow nor one pig which was left out'.

In 2021, hiding a pig in your shed will be easier than concealing the contents of your piggy bank from the authorities. The Office for National Statistics (ONS) plans to use new legal powers, slipped through Parliament last year, to trawl income tax and social security records and compile profiles of everyone's worth.

   

More from Richard Littlejohn for the Daily Mail...

The ONS claims it needs to build up a database of prosperous postcodes, so that services can be concentrated on 'vulnerable' areas. Cobblers. This is the first step towards introducing a wealth tax and a local income tax, so that the 'rich' pay more.

The census is not about serving the common good. It's about divide and rule, carving up the country into different and competing victim and special interest groups. They are also planning to tap into mobile phone records to track our movements, in an outrageous expansion of state surveillance. Already, Britain has more CCTV cameras than any other country on earth.

None of this is about providing better public services, it's about control. Knowledge is power, knowledge is valuable and can be sold to the highest bidder.

The tech giants already harvest our online habits, which they can then parlay into commercial gain by bombarding us with advertising. Naturally, the Government wants a piece of the action.

Of course, they pay lip service to security. But would you trust any Government official with a shred of evidence which isn't essential?

Never mind individual civil servants and rogue coppers using sensitive information to spy on and discredit others.

Look at the way local councils misuse anti-terrorism legislation to monitor parents attempting to circumvent school catchment areas to get their kids a decent education.

How many times have we heard of Government staff downloading 'secure' records and then leaving them on a train somewhere?

We know that the DVLA sells our vehicle information to private parking companies. Only yesterday, it was revealed that the Department of Health is handing over the medical records of British cancer patients to American lawyers acting for Big Tobacco.

Always work on the basis that no information you supply to the Government — or anyone else for that matter — is confidential or secure, and you won't go far wrong.

The next census, as usual, will be produced in dozens of different languages, many of them scribble. But we still won't know how many people are living here, legal or otherwise.

MPs admitted last week that they haven't got a clue about the number of foreign nationals living under the radar in Britain, because no such information exists and there's no reliable method of measuring it.

Richard Littlejohn argues that the census is not about serving the common good or providing better public services but about control

Best guess is somewhere between two and three million. But don't expect the census to clarify that.

Illegal immigrants aren't going to fill in a census form. Nor are transients, or many of those living in overcrowded inner-cities, where English is rarely spoken.

So, once again, the law will only apply to those who agree to abide by it and the 2021 census will be just another excuse by the Government to invade our privacy, fine and tax us more.

As for all this information leading to better provision of public services, well, last time out more than 400,000 people identified their religion as 'Jedi', but I haven't noticed state-funded Jedi community centres springing up everywhere. Have you?

At least not all the information they gather is wasted, which is why they're so keen on asking about gender identity.

The good news is that, while the rest of our public services are falling apart, we now also lead the world in transgender toilet provision, and the NHS is offering free cervical smear tests to men who define as women, even though they haven't got a cervix.

Makes you proud to be British. 

 

Here's another one of those stories I don't know whether to file under Mind How You Go or You Couldn't Make It Up.

A policewoman has been awarded £15,000 compensation because she couldn't carry an Alsatian up a hill. No, I can't believe I've just written that sentence, either.

PC Kim-Louise Carter applied to join the Gloucestershire canine unit. One of the tests involves carrying a dog up a 70-yard gradient. When she failed to carry a 5½st Alsatian called Hulk up the hill, she was given another chance with a lighter dog called Fizz.

But she dropped Fizz, too, complaining that her legs had 'turned to jelly'. It didn't help that during the exam her dog got into a fight with another one and bit a police officer.

Maybe she's just not cut out to be a dog handler. Yet despite the fact that three other women candidates did pass the test, Kim-Louise cried 'sex discrimination'.

And, with depressing predictability, a tribunal agreed with her, ruling that the test must be made easier and ordering instructors to undergo 'equality training'.

Perhaps the police should get rid of all their Alsatians and in future use something smaller like a dachshund, chihuahua, or some other miniature breed that PC Carter can keep in her handbag.

 

Had to laugh at the man who blew himself up trying to rob a Glasgow ATM. Police are still looking for his accomplice. Last night they issued a photo of the two men they believe were responsible, possibly under the influence of bevvy

 
 

Nick Clegg, rejected by his former constituents in Sheffield, is claiming £115,000 a year in allowances previously only given to ex-Prime Ministers. Why should taxpayers have to subsidise Calamity Clegg, when he devotes all his time attempting to overturn the democratic decision of the 17.4 million who voted for Brexit?

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-5273227/Dont-tell-em-Pike-RICHARD-LITTLEJOHN-2021-census.html#ixzz54NH3P6Ff
Follow us:
@MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

H.F.1442

H.F.730

Brought-forward from August 2003

[THE WAY AHEAD TO RECLAIM OUR SACRED INHERITANCE.]

Faced with the possible imposition (illegally) of a E. U. Constitution this  article contemplating our own U.K. Constitution (English Constitution), is especially topical.

J. Bingley

Constitutional Principles of Power and Remedy.

The Constitution is specifically intended, indeed designed to limit the powers of the state with respect to the people. The Constitution sets a standard upon which the performance of governance may be measured and contested and to provide remedy if abused.

The whole constitution originates its authority from

COMMON LAW

Supremacy resides in the

LAW and PEOPLE

NOT THE

CROWN or PARLIAMENT.

It is a matter of constitutional principle and legal fact that,

THE LAW IS SUPREME

The rule of law is the antithesis of arbitrary power. Integral with this, is the system of jury trial. It places the power of law enforcement in the

HANDS of the PEOPLE.

This the most vital safeguard against DESPOTISM.

The English Constitution's function is to

PROTECT the

"RIGHTS and LIBERTIES

 of ENGLISHMEN".

These are the 'BIRTHRIGHT' of the PEOPLE'

[In 2016 one can see how successive governments have by gradualism watered down these rights with even attempts to replace jury trial by trial by judge only on the grounds of speed and saving resources. The people in the main have been, amiss in not being vigilant to the protection of THEIR CONSTITUTION. In just a few weeks on the 23 June,2016 they have a choice whether to vote to leave the EU and regain THEIR LAW-THEIR CONSTITUTION-THEIR FREE COUNTRY. or REMAIN in an ALIEN COLLECTIVIST AND CORRUPT UNDEMOCRATIC EU with NO PROTECTION of MAGNA CARTA of 1215 and BILL OF RIGHTS of 1688 and NO ENGLISHMAN'S ' RIGHTS and LIBERTIES' to be passed on to FUTURE GENERATIONS.]

The fundamental rights and liberties are listed in the preamble of the Coronation Oath Act of 1688 which declares that  the oath is taken for the purpose of

" Maintaining our spiritual and civil rights and properties"

It is a contract with the people which makes it the permanent duty of the CROWN, and the CROWN in both GOVERNMENT and PARLIAMENT.

This contracts the Monarch to govern only according to the STATUTE, COMMON LAW, and the CUSTOM and to 'CAUSE LAW and JUSTICE with MERCY to be used in all JUDGEMENTS'.

All power of governance is vested in the CROWN.

The two Houses of Parliament may upon their concurrence offer bills for ROYAL ASSENT.

A BILL is not ENACTED until it has been authorised by the SOVEREIGN POWER.

Whilst the enacting power (a royal prerogative) of Royal Assent is entirely vested with the monarch it is contracted ONLY TO BE USED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CONSTITUTIONAL LAW.  This is a limitation and essential safeguard to protect the people from any over mighty governance  [such as Tony Blair's and Gordon Brown's NEW LABOUR and since DAVE'S PARTY]

 It was used  to defeat the Divine Right of Kings; a claim of absolute power by the Stuart monarchs.  The OATH ascertains the SUPREMACY of the LAW, not the supremacy of CROWN or of PARLIAMENT.

There is certainly no Divine Right of Politicians.

The Coronation contract is of the Crown owing allegiance to the Constitution. The PEOPLE give ALLEGIANCE to the CROWN.

Here is a system of mutual protection for there is a constitutional interdependence.

The MAGNA CARTA

made provision for the PEOPLE to use ANY MEANS including FORCE if the CROWN is found to be in BREACH.

[THE CROWN IS IN BREACH!]

THE RIGHT OF RESISTANCE IS THE ULTIMATE REMEDY...

That which constitutionally binds the Monarch is a restriction upon Her Majesty, Her Government and all Parliamentary power.  The Monarch may do no wrong, but should she refuse by her negative power( the right to withhold assent) to

'LET WRONG BE DONE.'

[Millions of patriots have been waiting over four decades for:-

'Right to be Done!']

Sir William Blackstone confirms this. Whilst the monarch accepts the advice of ministers, they must only advise to do that which COMPLIES with the CONSTITUTION.  Plainly NO MONARCH is FREE to ASSENT to ADVICE that CONFLICTS with the CONSTITUTION in FORCE.

There is no authority in Parliament to pass any power of governance in England to those who hold or owe no allegiance. [such as the EU]

 There is no constitutional authority for Parliament to deliberately breach the constitutional laws by new   conflicting enactment.

 There is a natural duty resulting from the logic of our constitutional law to debate and resolve conflicts, if necessary by prior repeal.

 We must put an end to this form of 'legal' abuse, particularly through the misapplication of party politics.

 Most but not all of our constitution is written:- the Magna Carta, the Petition of Rights, the Declaration of Rights, the Bill of Rights, the Act of Settlement and the Acts of Union etc. It has evolved over centuries with the expenditure of much blood. It has been abused and corrected many times. It was finally settled by the Glorious Revolution of 1688/9.

The Judicial function is to be the independent arbiter between party and party or party and government under the terms of our constitutional law.  The courts are bound to declare upon the constitutionality of an Act where it may prove to be an action of unconstitutional governance. The great examples of the Magna Carta, the Petition 1628, the Declaration & the Bill of Rights 1688/9 make this duty of the court utterly plain.

Judgement may only be given in accordance with the constraints of constitutional laws in force.  At all times the presumption of law and justice in mercy be upheld and used  in all judgements. This is the trust sand the pre-eminent public policy reposed in the judiciary.

The right of petition to the Monarch is an appeal direct to the source of power, the Monarch is under OATH and at LAW, bound to provide REMEDY. Where there are RIGHTS there are REMEDIES. Politicians and Parliament must abide by the terms of reference and DUTY to the CONSTITUTION.

A fixed and certain standard with protection and remedy are the true purpose of the Constitution.

WE MUST RECLAIM OUR CONSTITUTION AND THE RULE OF LAW FROM THE SUPPOSED DIVINE RIGHT OF OUR POLITICIANS.

John Bingley-AUGUST 2003

*

[We ask how did it come to pass that the JUDICIARY did not PROTECT the CONSTITUTION from the illegal actions of PARLIAMENT and the Crown with the disclosures in 2001 under the 30 year rule from the Public Record Office at

 KEW-LONDON

 which revealed the CONSPIRACY of the FOREIGN OFFICE to prevent the PEOPLE from hearing the TRUTH of their TREACHERY and BETRAYAL. Under the 1969 THE VIENNA TREATY CONVENTION on the  LAW of TREATIES  there are two key provisions which authorise a signatory power to abrogate a bilateral or multilateral treaty unilaterally, without giving the stipulated notice.

1. Where corruption has been demonstrated in respect of pro curing the treaty in the first place, or in respect of any dimension of its implementation, the European Commission (EC) permits and is associated with corruption on a monumental scale, which the EU authorities have tried to cover up with declining success.

". Where there has been a material change of circumstances. A material change of circumstances has surfaced into the daylight (September 2005), to begin with, following the death of

Edward Heath.

. It has been revealed that he was an agent of a foreign power (NAZI-GERMANY-since 1938), accepted corrupt payment for his services, and lied to the British people concerning the nature of the geopolitical trap into which he had been instructed by his handlers to lead them-and that he did all this on behalf of a foreign power which has all along disguised its continuing Nazi orientation.

[Massive payouts were given to the signatories of the  EEC which in reality was in effect the road to the corrupt-collectivist-undemocratic

FEDERAL STATE of the EUROPEAN UNION.]

*

[THE QUEEN FAILED IN HER SOLEMN DUTY TO PROTECT HER PEOPLE AND THEIR UNIQUE WORLD RENOWNED FREE PARLIAMENTARY INHERITANCE

AND APART FROM SIGNING ILLEGALLY 6 EU TREATIES CONTRARY TO HER CORONATION OATH-IN 1998 SIGNED TONY BLAIR'S SECRET AMENDMENT BILL  FOR TREASON FROM THE DEATH PENALTY TO IMPRISONMENT FOR LIFE-OBVIOUSLY THEY BOTH HAD REASONS  FOR FEARING A FUTURE IMPEACHMENT BY PARLIAMENT.

 

More!

 

 

A MATTER OF TREASON

The behaviour of our politicians over the past thirty-five years has confirmed the dangers of one-party rule which was warned of over two millennium ago . The greatest danger we face is from within BY THE TREASONABLE ACTIONS of many of our politicians and judges who should know better and those close to our sovereign Queen Elizabeth II the PRIVY COUNSELLORS of the REALM.
 
Before we proceed we will state the oaths taken by our Privy Counsellors to the Queen and also to the European Union. We are at a loss to understand how it is possible to take the oath to Queen and Country and yet still take the oath to the EU.
 
CONFLICT OF DUTIES AND LOYALTIES
 

THE UNITED KINGDOM
 

THE OATH OF A PRIVY COUNSELLOR

 
'You do swear by Almighty God to be true and faithful Servant unto the Queen's Majesty's Privy Council. You will not know or understand of any manner of thing to be attempted, done, or spoken against Her Majesty's Person. Honour, Crown, or Dignity Royal, but you will let and withstand the same to the uttermost of your Power, and either cause it to be revealed to her Majesty Herself, or to such of Her Privy Council as shall advertise Her Majesty of the same. You will, in all things to be removed, treated, and debated in Council, faithly and truly declare your Mind and Opinion. According to your Heart and Conscience; and will keep secret all Matters committed and revealed unto you, or that shall be treated of secretly in Council. And if any of the said Treaties or Counsels shall touch any of the Counsellors, you will not reveal it unto him, but will keep the same until such time as, by the Consent of Her Majesty, or of the Council, Publication shall be made thereof. You will in your uttermost bear Faith and Allegiance unto the Queen's Majesty; and will assist and defend all Jurisdictions, Pre-eminence's, and Authorities, granted to her Majesty, annexed to the Crown by Acts of Parliament, or otherwise, against all Foreign Princes, Persons, Prelates, States, or Potentates. And generally in all things you will do as a faithful and true Servant ought to do to Her Majesty. SO HELP ME GOD. '
 
THE EUROPEAN UNION
 

The OATH SWORN BY COMMISSIONERS - BEFORE THE EUROPEAN COURT OF JUSTICE
 
'I solemnly undertake to perform my duties in complete independence in the general interest of the Communities in carrying out my duties neither to seek nor to take instructions from my government or body, to refrain from any action incompatible with my duties. I formally note the undertaking of each member state to respect this principle and not to seek to influence members of the Commission in the performance of their task. I further undertake to respect both during and after my term of office the obligations arising therefrom and in particular the duty to behave with integrity and discretion as regards the acceptance after I have ceased to hold office of certain appointments or benefits. '
 

Our Constitution was only safe so long as our Representatives were persons of INTEGRITY unfortunately it is clear that any person owning allegiance to Her Majesty could not in all honesty sign the oath to the European Union. We have therefore in our midst many TRAITORS to her Majesty and to the people of these Islands. We hope one day to have these Traitors tried by a SUPREME Constitutional Court when England one day will return to being a FREE INDEPENDENT NATION STATE of a Greater Britain. It is only a few decades ago when the last TRAITOR in England was" hanged by the neck until he was dead ". I t is our opinion that the actions of those who knowingly gave away the

 " Rights and Liberties "

of the English People

should suffer the maximum sentence prescribed by law, in memory of those millions of our people who gave their lives for their country, even in the last few weeks.
 
We will list every person that has had a hand in traitorously betraying this country in a TRAITORS GALLERY and see that these names are known by the people of this country. We ask anyone who is aware of anyone who has taken an Oath to let us know for inclusion in our list.
 
OVER TWO THOUSAND YEARS AGO THE FOLLOWING WORDS WERE SPOKEN BY A GREAT SENATOR OF ROME .
 
" A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and he carries his banners openly. But the TRAITOR moves among those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the TRAITOR appears no TRAITOR; he speaks in the accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their garments, and appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of men. He rots the soul of a nation; he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of a city; he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A MURDERER IS LESS TO BE FEARED".
 
CICERO ,
Marcus Tullius (106-43 B.C. ) Rom. Orator

[COMMENTS IN BRACKETS ARE OURS}

MAY 30-2016

H.F.800

 

 

Weekly Geo-Political News and Analysis

by Benjamin Fulford

 

Happy New Year: Hundreds of top Khazarian mobsters, including the Bush family, renditioned to Gitmo

 

In a historic moment of poetic justice, most of the U.S.-based top perpetrators of the fake “war on terror” have now themselves been renditioned to the U.S. Navy camp in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, Pentagon sources say.  “The Rothschild assets George Soros, Peter Munk, Peter Sutherland, the Bushes, the Podestas, and many others may have been airlifted to Gitmo for military tribunals, as the Department of Defense spends $500M to upgrade the prison and send more military police and Marines,” the sources say.

In one of many signs of just how historic the new American revolution is, “30 congressmen will not be returning in the new year,” the Pentagon sources say.  CIA sources also confirm that former U.S. President Bill Clinton, hoping for a plea bargain, is spilling the beans on people like former CIA head John Brennan, top U.S. Mossad agent Rahm Emmanuel, former Vice President Dick Cheney, and many others.

Furthemore, as U.S. President Donald Trump proclaims Janaury 2018 to be “Anti-Slavery Month,”
 

https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/president-donald-j-trump-proclaims-january-2018-national-slavery-human-trafficking-prevention-month/

… human trafficking centers around the world are being raided and shut down.  In Saudi Arabia, 3,000 child sex slaves have been freed, according to Russian FSB sources.  In the U.S., “there was a power outage on December 27th at the “pedo heaven Disneyland,” as the place was raided by special forces fighting human slavers, the Pentagon sources say.  In apparently connected events, Washington Post heir Bill Graham and Jordan Feldstein, the brother of the actor Jonah Hill, died last week, the sources point out.

Another move was that Julian Assange “was extracted from the Ecuadorian Embassy to take down the cabal, and he may be pardoned along with Mike Flynn,” the sources add.

Also, “On Christmas day, Delta Force raided a mansion owned by former President Barack Obama in …
 

The remainder of this article is only available to members of BenjaminFulford.net
Please Log In or Register to create an account.

 

Merry Christmas:  The 13 “Illuminati” bloodline families sue for peace

Peace on earth and goodwill to all (and not just men, but all life forms) is looking like a realistic goal for 2018 now that the 13 “Illuminati” * bloodline families, seeing their ancient rule of planet Earth collapsing, are suing for peace.  Last week a representative of the G7 (Germany, the U.K., the corporate U.S., Japan, Italy, France, and Canada) met with a representative of the White Dragon Society (WDS) to discuss peace terms, according to a WDS member who was present at the meeting.  The G7, of course, is the political front for the 13 bloodline families.  There can be no doubt that this meeting was made possible by people inside the military-industrial complex acting in the spirit of Jesus Christ, and for this we wish them all “a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year.”

The bloodline offer to negotiate peace is directly connected to the state of emergency that was declared last week by USA President Donald Trump.  If you have not seen it yet, please read the historic document in the link below.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/text-letter-president-congress-united-states-6/

“After Hanukkah, Trump declared a state of emergency and signed an executive order on December 20th freezing the assets of those accused of human rights abuses and corruption, a catch-all to bankrupt the Bushes, Clintons, Soros, Obama, the Cabal, and the global Jewish mafia,” was how a Pentagon source summed up the situation.

“The national emergency allows Trump to seize assets and unleash the military to carry out mass arrests and adjudicate via military tribunals, effectively imposing martial law,” the source continues.

The Pentagon source also sent a copy of this photograph with the explanation, “Trump wears purple when unveiling his national security strategy on December 18th in a victory lap over the Soros/Hillary purple revolution, and drinks water with both hands to simulate handcuffs.”

Clearly reacting to this situation, the representative of the bloodlines set the meeting for December 23rd, the birthday of the Japanese Emperor, and claimed to be a representative of the Imperial family as well as the G7.  The representative, who acted as if he was negotiating a surrender, said the bloodlines want to keep existing nation-states and institutions as they are, but…
 

The remainder of this article is only available to members of BenjaminFulford.net
Please Log In or Register to create an account.

 

Letter to the Editor – Experimental Quantum Anti-Gravity Successfully Replicated

 

I would like to let you know that my anti-gravity experiments have been successfully replicated by the Aerospace Engineering Department at the New Sciences & Technologies Faculty of the University of Tehran in the Islamic Republic of Iran. I have developed complete quantum anti-gravity hypothesis with direct testable predictions that are simple, clear, easy, and inexpensive.

As you know, present-day quantum gravity theories suffer from too many mathematical space dimensions, and from too few conclusive experimental results.

My hypothesis is simple, clear, and subject to easy empirical verification.  I offer clear explanation of the principles of quantum gravity, and also precisely describe how to perform simple and inexpensive experiments to verify it.

In order to clearly understand quantum anti-gravity, please follow these 8 steps:

  1. Start from this brief overview — Quantum Gravity in a Nutshell
  2. The theoretical basis for quantum gravity are the Abraham’s equations of the Abraham-Minkowski controversy, and their empirical counterpart — the Abraham force
  3. To understand how the Biefeld-Brown effect works, you need to be clear where B-B vectors point — “up” or “down”
  4. The Biefeld-Brown effect is an instance of the Abraham force.
  5. Study the section about gyroscope’s anomalous effect.
  6. Please, study all the material on THE BOYD BUSHMAN EFFECT page in order to appreciate the potential complex magnetic fields have for shaping quantum gravity interactions.
  7. Now, you are ready to read the short introduction to quantum gravity.
  8. Perform two simple experiments for empirical verification.

The following are the 10 “mysteries” that my hypothesis sheds new light upon:

  1. The main prediction of my hypothesis (2016) is that anti-hydrogen will anti-gravitate.
  2. Gravitational waves mystery.
  3. EmDrive mystery.
  4. Solar mystery.
  5. Mass mystery.
  6. Bicycle mystery.
  7. Propeller  mystery.
  8. Cloud mystery.
  9. Pioneer mystery.
  10. Missing mystery.

I have designed 4 progressively more complex experiments, and we have successfully performed one of them, the one of medium difficulty, which constitutes:

The empirical discovery of hitherto unknown physical interaction between angular momentum of a spinning gyroscope and Earth’s magnetic and electric fields.

To perform this experiment, we need a gyroscope with a vertical support, and magnetic and electric shielding cages.

According to my hypothesis, there will be a measurable time difference between a freely spinning gyroscope inside, and outside the cages.  A gyroscope freely spinning inside both cages will come to rest in less time than when spinning outside them.

The experiment was performed successfully and was recorded in the following two videos:

To have a clear idea what is involved in the experiment, please take a closer look at the above two videos first.

For the experiment, we used the following small and light gyroscope at 10,000 rpm:

It would be much better to use a heavier gyro, because the heavier the gyro, the stronger the effect, at the same rate of rpm.

The value of angular velocity (rpm) is important only insofar as to generate sufficient angular momentum to allow the gyro to spin freely for a longer time before it comes to rest.

The objective of the experiment was to obtain two values of the gyro’s run time:

  • Outside the shielding;
  • Inside the shielding.

In my experiment, the two sample values are, respectively:

  • 55.54 seconds
  • 51.87 seconds

There was a 3.67 second difference, which amounts to 6.6%.  The time difference is directly proportional to the quality and quantity of electrostatic shielding of the Faraday cage. Applying the magnetic shielding in addition to the electric one would further increase the time difference.

As you can see in the video, it is important that the gyro is elevated by means of a vertical support.  Ideally, gyro should start spinning as close to a vertical position as possible, and also be able to pass lower, while still spinning, than its horizontal position.

The reason for this effect is that the gyroscope inside the cages will be spinning in reduced strength of Earth’s magnetic and electric fields, which in turn reduces the strength of the Biefeld-Brown effect acting upon it.

The gyroscope outside the cages, spinning in the undiminished strength of Earth’s magnetic and electric fields, is subject to the full influence of the Biefeld-Brown effect that causes the gyroscope to resist Earth’s gravity pull, which happens to be none other than pure natural antigravity effect.

OBJECTIONS

  • All conductors, like the brass gyro, exhibit an effective diamagnetism when they experience a changing magnetic field.  The Lorentz force on electrons causes them to circulate around forming eddy currents.  The eddy currents then produce an induced magnetic field that opposes the applied field and resist the conductor’s motion.

—  That is true for both, the gyro spinning inside and outside the Faraday cage in Earth’s magnetic field.  It does not make any difference.

  • But the gyro’s induced magnetic field will generate eddy currents in the Faraday cage and the resultant magnetic field will slow down gyro’s spin (magnetic breaking), and hence the whole effect.  It is like dropping a magnet down a copper pipe: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8dFFL8TDt2Q

—   The analogy in the video applies, but only in principle.  Spinning brass gyro is not a strong neodymium magnet, and if, in principle, it generates any magnetic field, it is so weak that it will not even affect a needle of a compass.  As opposed to the copper pipe in the video, the enamel-coated copper mesh Faraday cage has much larger diameter (the inverse-square law), so it is enough to drop a strong neodymium magnet down the Faraday cage to see how much it would slow down, if at all.  As you can see in the above video, even few empty slits in the copper pipe greatly weaken the eddy currents, this being the reason for using enamel-coated copper mesh.  Diamagnetic materials, like brass, or copper, have a relative magnetic permeability that is less than or equal to 1, and therefore a magnetic susceptibility less than or equal to 0, since susceptibility is defined as χv=μv−1.  This means that diamagnetic materials, in principle, are repelled by magnetic fields.  However, since diamagnetism is such a weak property, its effects are not observable in everyday life.  Moreover, there is a big difference between Faraday cage made of solid copper, and one made of enamel-coated copper mesh.  The magnetic field induced in the gyro is weak, because Earth’s magnetic field is weak, so whatever little eddy currents could be induced by the gyro in solid copper Faraday cage will become irrelevant in the enamel-coated copper mesh Faraday cage, as you can see in the following two videos:

Even though it is true that the experiment, in principle, is open to influences from various phenomena, including the Carnegie curve, the overall result is clearly well beyond being attributed exclusively to these other phenomena.

To completely eliminate above objections, magnetic shielding needs to be applied in addition to the Faraday cage, and the gyro should be custom-made from a material which does not allow for eddy currents to flow in it.

Naturally,  I will be happy to answer any questions that you may have for me regarding the theoretical foundations as well as replication of the experiment.

With respect and much gratitude,  I am
Sincerely yours,

U.S. troops deploy worldwide with 10,000 sealed indictments to take down Khazarian mob

U.S. President Donald Trump spent the weekend at Camp David with his top generals to map out the exact strategy for decapitating the Khazarian mafia worldwide, say Pentagon sources.  “The Atlanta airport was shut down, while the Department of Defense refused to disclose the locations of 44,000 U.S. troops who may be involved in terminating the cabal worldwide,” a senior Pentagon source said.  There are now close to 10,000 sealed indictments as more and more of the Khazarian criminals give up evidence on their colleagues, the sources say.

There are also many extra-judicial killings going on.  “The liberal sanctuary city mayor of San Francisco, Edwin Lee, dropped dead after an illegal alien was found not guilty in the murder of Kate Steinle even after his confession,” one source notes.  “Lee’s death is a message to the Democrats and sanctuary city mayors like Rahm Emmanuel of Chicago and Bill De Blasio of New York City,” the source warns.

The Khazarian mob is also killing off lots of people.  In Japan, two former executives of Toshiba, Atsutoshi Nishida and Taizo Nishimura, suddenly died in the past two months because they were about to provide evidence about the March 11, 2011 Fukushima tsunami and nuclear terror attack against Japan, according to sources close to the royal family.

This attack was carried out by henchmen of the Rockefeller family, whose members include Hillary and Bill Clinton, the sources say.  The Rockellers, in turn, were taking orders from the fascist P2 Freemason lodge, they say.  The Rockefeller family, by the way, has elected Mel Rockefeller, the son of Nelson Rockefeller, as the new family head, these sources added.

In Canada, Barry Sherman, owner of the Canadian pharmaceutical giant Apotex, was found hanging dead alongside his wife Honey by the family’s indoor pool.  According to CIA sources, Sherman was …
 

The remainder of this article is only available to members of BenjaminFulford.net
Please Log In or Register to create an account.

 

 

H.F.1430

 

How and Why Was WWI Planned and Prolonged

Mujahid Kamran

August 1, 2017

The history of the First World War is a deliberately concocted lie. Not the sacrifice, the heroism, the horrendous waste of life or the misery that followed. No, these were very real but the truth of how it all began and how it was unnecessarily and deliberately prolonged beyond 1915 has been successfully covered up for a century. A carefully falsified history was created to conceal the fact that Britain, not Germany, was responsible for the war. Had the truth become known after 1918, the consequences for the British Establishment would have been cataclysmic.”

Gerry Docherty and Jim Macgregor

The Planners and the Plan

The First World War did not just happen. There is undeniable evidence that the war was planned by the international-banker controlled British oligarchy almost two decades before it broke out (see e.g. [1-3]). In their outstanding book Gerry Docherty and Jim Macgregor have established beyond reasonable doubt that indeed the First World War was planned by a tiny group of members of the British oligarchy including Nathaniel Rothschild [1].

King Edward VII

While building upon what was first revealed by the late Professor Carrol Quigley, they have not only provided detailed evidence in favor of this thesis, but have also revealed the astonishing role of the British monarch, King Edward VII, in secretly building alliances against Germany. They have provided ample evidence that the playboy King, much disliked by his mother Queen Victoria, went along with the secret group that had, in the first place, planned this horrific war.

The secret group of people, whose existence was first revealed by Professor Carrol Quigley, thus putting his own life in danger, decided to work behind the scenes with the utmost secrecy. The revelations of Professor Quigley were based on documents provided by the Secret Elite, as they are referred to sometimes. The documents were provided for the purpose of writing a sanitized history.

The goal of the Secret Elite was the expansion of the British empire to the total exclusion of other powers.

This cabal was extremely wealthy. Cecil Rhodes, who, with Rothschild help, had amassed a huge fortune in South Africa, first discussed his plans with Nathaniel Rothschild in February 1890 in the presence of a few members of the British oligarchy.

In 1891 a five-member secret group comprising Cecil Rhodes, Nathaniel Rothschild, William Stead, Lord Esher and Alfred Milner became, unknown to anyone else, the core group that decided to steer the world towards a war aimed at the destruction of Germany. They called themselves the Society of the Elect. Around themselves they built, as if in a concentric circle, The Association of Helpers, eminent men, who did not know of the Society of the Elect. Other men were gradually involved in the plan but they were not aware of the separate existence of the five-member core. Together, these men steered and controlled the course of British foreign policy, unknown to the Parliament, the people, the Cabinet, and others who were constitutionally relevant.

These men represented a new phenomenon on the world stage – the money kings, who held no office and yet had real power to decide the fate of nations. When Rhodes died at age 48, he left all his money to these men for the sole purpose of extending the British empire over the entire globe. Secrecy was of utmost importance to this group.

The destruction of Germany, the Secret Elite knew, would entail enormous bloodshed. They also knew that Britain could not do it alone. It needed the strength of the Russian and French armies to achieve that end.

Russian soldiers WW1

And maybe the Secret Elite wanted Russia and France to shed their own and German blood for them. But France had been a traditional enemy of the British and vice versa whereas Russia and Britain had vied for the control of the Black Sea and the annexation of Constantinople i.e. Istanbul. There was rivalry between Russia and Britain regarding the Russian urge southwards and eastwards to warm waters, seaports that could function round the year. In the south lay the “jewel” of the British empire – India.

Despite these rivalries the Secret Elite was determined to befriend and woo both France and Russia because it considered Germany the most potent threat to the existence of the British empire. Germany was not fully aware of this heinous plan aimed at its utter destruction. And Russia and France, both were trapped by the Secret Elite. In fact, the Secret Elite succeeded not only in destroying Germany, they also destroyed Russia, and by prolonging the war, destroyed the Ottoman as well as the Austro-Hungarian empires. Britain, in the end, did not really benefit. The Zionists did – the Illuminati Zionist bankers emerged as the real force on the world stage. The Milners and the Eshers and Balfours, and all others became powerless eventually and faded away.

The Rothschilds have continued into the 21st century enhancing their power and wealth with every major bloodshed. They and their illuminati banking brethren were the real beneficiaries. The Christian West was the real loser. And so were the Muslims.

It is well known among historians that Queen Victoria disapproved of her son’s womanizing and kept his royal stipend at a minimum while she was in power. The expenses of the womanizing of King Edward VII, when he was a playboy Prince of Wales, were borne by the Rothschilds and by Sir Ernest Cassel, both bankers of German-Jewish extraction. When he came to power Edward VII was keen to oblige his patrons who, apparently, wanted to destroy the emerging German nation. And, in any case he was under the impression that the destruction of Germany would pave the way for a global British Empire – it was to be his empire.

The Zionist/Illuminati international bankers had other plans. King Edward VII was the architect of the Entente Cordiale of 1904. His image as a playboy concealed the fact that he was traveling all over Europe to build alliances against Germany, while Germany never suspected that traditional enemies like England and France could or would become friends.

Docherty and Macgregor also describe the infiltration of the Foreign Office and the Colonial Office of Great Britain by agents of the group that had planned the First World War. They were able to control the officers of both government departments. They also controlled the War Office as well as the highly important and secret Committee of Imperial Defense. The Group had influence in both parties. Their policy of destroying Germany not only transcended party politics, it also went beyond which party was in power – it transcended governments.

The Parliaments and the prime ministers came and went without knowing that a tiny cabal was planning and relentlessly driving Britain to total war with Germany.

*

Cover up and Fabricated History

Docherty and Macgregor have further revealed that (p 5, ref. [1]):

The Secret Elite dictated the writing and teaching of history, from the ivory towers of the academia down to the smallest of schools. They carefully controlled the publication of official government papers, the selection of documents for inclusion in the official version of the history of the First World War, and refused access to any evidence that might betray their covert existence. Incriminating documents were burned, removed from official records, shredded, falsified, or deliberately rewritten, so that what remained for historians was carefully selected material.”

Docherty and Macgregor point out (their book was published in 2013) that even “To this day researchers are denied access to certain First World War documents because the Secret Elite had much to fear from the truth, as do those who have succeeded them.” Why such a vehement cover up that even a century later the British authorities do not grant access to certain documents pertaining to the first World War? They want to maintain the myth of German culpability and their innocence, whereas the reality is the reverse of what establishment history portrays. The truth will shift the onus of responsibility to the shoulders of the Secret Elite and of every other consequence that followed: the Second World War, Bank of International Settlements, IMF, World Bank, the U.N., Israel, the Korean and Vietnam wars, continuing wars in the Middle East, right up to the dangerous situation today. They have lied to generations and rather than let the truth be known they have chosen and attempted to perpetuate the lie worldwide and for all times.

They can do so because the international illuminati-Zionist bankers are all powerful and control the American and British governments. Israel is a Rothschild fiefdom, a source of perpetual war and a possible eventual Armageddon. The academia is, by and large, part of this cover up and that is very sad, to say the least. Any historian in a university who challenges the establishment version will be ostracized, if not thrown out of his job. Nick Kollerstrom had to lose his job despite the fact that he is an outstanding academic. One of his colleagues, whom he had known for years, was so angry that he told Kollerstrom that he wanted to hit him with his racket!

Guido Preparata was ostracized for his outstanding book Conjuring Hitler: How Britain and America Built the Third Reich, and had to quit his job, leave the U.S., and even give up his research career for some time. It is therefore significant that Docherty and Macgregor, though British (both are Scottish) do not work for any British university. They, therefore, cannot be thrown out of their jobs.

On the surface of it, the strategic aim behind the instigated and covertly planned World War I was to destroy both Germany and Russia and thereby kill the possibility of emergence of a dominant Eurasian power, or a powerful coalition of Eurasian countries, that could threaten the British Empire. The initial group, the Circle of the Elect, appeared to have, as its aim, the establishment of a worldwide British Empire. It only included one banker, Nathaniel Rothschild. With hindsight, the evolution of global affairs indicates without any doubt that the Zionists (Communism and Zionism sprouted from the same Illuminati “tribe” and had a common origin) were the real beneficiaries and the deeper instigators of this war.

The world today is headed towards a global slave state controlled by the Illuminati cum Zionist international bankers. The Bolshevik Revolution was led and controlled by “atheistic Jews” (to use Churchill’s phrase) most of whom came from outside Russia and both Lloyd David George and President Wilson were stooges of the Zionists. Today both, the U.S. and the U.K., are completely controlled by the Zionist cum Illuminati international bankers.

However, other deeper aims of the international bankers were to weaken Christianity through widespread death and destruction of Christian life and property, to weaken European governments by exhaustively bleeding them and bringing them under deep debt bondage, to instigate the Bolshevik Revolution, to facilitate the creation of Israel and the establishment of a supra-national organization through which to set up a One World Government under their ruthless and absolute control (The New World Order). The international bankers were simultaneously Zionists and Freemasons/Illuminati.

A photo of the 1914 Christmas Truce illustrates how the British and Germans had no antipathy until it was created by propaganda and the war itself

*

Building Japan, Bruising and then Wooing Russia after Sabotaging a Russo German Treaty

It was the Secret Elite that was behind the strategy to build Japan’s navy that was then used to destroy the Russian fleet that traveled around the world to confront the Japanese navy. The Russian fleet was utterly destroyed in the Russo-Japanese war of 1904-1905 and the small island nation managed to inflict a humiliating defeat on a giant. This was part of the strategy of the Secret Elite to curtail Russia’s ambitions in the Far East and to bruise and weaken her. Ships for the Japanese navy were quietly built in the shipyards of Britain. On the one hand, the Rothschilds in London secretly provided loans to Japan, while on the other the Rothschilds in France provided loans worth 400 million francs to the Russian government to build the 6365 miles long trans-Siberian railway (p 86, ref. [1]). The Russians had expressed their gratitude to the Rothschilds when the czar decorated Alfonso de Rothschild of Paris with Grand Cross. The London Rothschilds made double profits because the armament industry which manufactured battleships for the Japanese navy were partly owned by the Rothschilds. The Rothschilds had the greatest shares in Vickers armament. Docherty and Macgregor write (pp 92, 93 ref [1]):

Manipulators at the heart of the Secret Elite, like Esher, facilitated meetings held on Rothschild premises to help the Japanese financial envoy, Takahashi Korekiyo, raise their war chest. While banks with strong links to the Rothschilds were prepared to raise funds for Japan quite openly, the Rothschilds had to tread carefully because of their immense Russian investments, not least in the Baku oilfields. They were also very aware of the political repercussions that might ensue for Russian Jews who bore the harsh brunt of czarist anti-Semitism. That changed once the war was over. The London and Paris Rothschilds negotiated a further £48 million issue to help Japanese recovery. At every turn the war profits flowed back to the Secret Elite.”

It was Japan that attacked the Russian fleet in Port Arthur, a Chinese port that was functional all year round and had been leased to Russia. Although Japan issued a declaration of war on Feb 8, 1904, its navy attacked the Russian fleet three hours before the ultimatum was delivered to the Russian government.

In order to go to war with Germany the Secret Elite took four decisions. These are summarized by Docherty and Macgregor in the following words (pp 73,74, ref. [1]):

Foreign policy had to be sustained no matter what political party was in office; the British Army needed a complete overhaul to make it fit for the purpose; the Royal Navy had to maintain all its historic advantages; the general public had to be turned against Germany.”

The British public did not want to go to war with Germany and therefore a secretly driven but powerful propaganda campaign against Germany was launched in order to poison the minds of the public. The Belgian ambassador apparently noticed by 1903 that jingoism was on the rise in Britain and people were turning against Germany. He wrote to his government that this was merely because of jealousy. Docherty and Macgregor point out that the ambassador did not know that secret manipulation behind the scenes had resulted in this attitude.

The Secret Elite worked relentlessly using the vast Rhodes fortune at its disposal to buy politicians and men of influence in all countries that were relevant. One of the men in their pocket was Alexander Islovsky, who served them loyally to the immense detriment of Russia, Europe and the Christian West. Kaiser Wilhelm had made a brilliant move in 1905 – he wanted to have an agreement between Russia and Germany that would have averted the war by forming a defensive alliance.

The Kaiser and the Czar secretly met and signed an agreement on July 24, 1905 at Bjorko Finland, whereby if any one of the countries was attacked by a European power the other shall come to its aid. However, when the czar returned to Russia the agents of the Secret Elite as well as a bribed press opposed the ratification of the treaty. Actually no one knew of the contents of the treaty until the Czar confided in is his foreign minister Count Lansdorff who betrayed the secret to King Edward VII.

The Czar was in need of money after the Russo-Japanese war in which Russia suffered heavy material and human losses. He therefore needed loans and the Rothschilds in Paris were far richer than any Berlin banks. The Secret Elite threatened to block the much needed loans. This was crucial and the Czar backed off despite having signed the proposed treaty. This treaty, had it gone through, would have averted the planned world war. This caused the Kaiser immense pain and he wrote to the Czar (p 95 ref. [1]): “We joined hands and signed before God who heard our vows.” This mistake by the Czar was to cost Russia and Germany dearly during World War I.

Having sabotaged the Russo-German alliance the Secret Elite then used King Edward VII to woo Russia. The King invited the Russian navy to Britain and the British public was softened towards Russia through a media campaign. The Secret Elite managed to lure and trap Russia by a false promise of allowing Russia to control Constantinople (Istanbul) and the Black Sea Straits. A Russia that had been mauled militarily, that was in dire financial straits, and that was presented with a dangling Constantinople carrot succumbed and fell in the trap. An Anglo-Russian Convention was signed on 31 August 1907. Docherty and Macgregor write (pp 95,96 ref. [1]):

The Secret Elite was prepared to use any nation as cat’s-paw and Russia became the victim of British trickery, manipulated into a different treaty that was designed not to protect her or the peace of Europe but to enable the Secret Elite to destroy Germany. . . It was yet another secret deal hidden from Parliament and the people. . .

By such deceptions, lies, bribery and manipulations, the brutal and absolutely ruthless and utterly shameless Secret Elite proceeded to steer and goad nations to a path of unprecedented bloodshed in which Christian, and to a lesser extent Muslim blood was shed. The beneficiaries were the satanic illuminati international bankers and their brethren. Their determination to destroy Germany masked a deep and malevolent desire for a conflagration that would burn Christian Europe to ashes with tens of millions of casualties. That was their goal and they drew the deepest delight and satisfaction by turning men into savage animals.

The Myth of Belgian Neutrality

When World War I began the British public had been exposed to false propaganda for a long time. Two issues on which their mind had been falsely influenced were Belgian neutrality and German militarism. Facts were the opposite of what people were led to believe. As for Belgian neutrality, it was utterly untrue. Belgium was not only not neutral it had had close military links with Britain since 1905 when Britain offered to send “4 cavalry brigades, 2 armored corps, and a division of mounted infantry” to Belgium (p 106, ref. [1]). At that time nobody outside the close knit Secret Elite know of, or suspected, possible war with Germany.

Docherty and Macgregor write (pp 106, 107ref. [1]): “Britain’s military link with Belgium was one of the closes guarded secrets, even within privileged circles.” General Grierson, who was director of military operations was present at a secret 1905 meeting along with Lord Roberts, PM Balfour, Admiral Fisher and the head of naval intelligence, where a decision to take forward joint military planning with France and Belgium was taken. This was so secret that it was agreed that “the minutes would not be printed or circulated without special permission from the prime minister.” Docherty and MacGregor write further (p 107, ref. [1]):

Documents found in the Belgian secret archives by the Germans after they had occupied Brussels disclosed that the chief of the Belgian general staff, Major General Ducarne, held a series of meetings with the British military attache’ over action to be taken by British, French and Belgian armies against Germany in event of war. A fully elaborated plan detailed the landing and transportation of British forces, which were actually called ‘allied armies’, and in a series of meetings they discussed the allocation of Belgian officers and interpreters to the British Army and crucial details on the care and ‘accommodation of the wounded of the allied armies.’”

The British allowed Belgium to annex Congo Free State in return for a “secret agreement that was in everything but name an alliance. King Leopold II sold Belgian neutrality for African rubber and minerals.” Thus Belgium bargained away her neutral status and in return entered into a deep and hidden relationship with Britain against Germany. Docherty and Macgregor point out that here too King Edward VII played a hidden but important role because the King of Belgium was a cousin of Queen Victoria and was very fond of her. So much for Belgian neutrality that became a rallying cry to war for the misled and deliberately misinformed British public. The technique of using the media to control the public mindset continues to date and entails an incredible cost in terms of loss of human life and property.

The Myth of German Militarism

As for German militarism, Docherty and Macgregor have provided irrefutable data that clearly establishes that Britain was spending far more secretly on arming itself compared to Germany. In reality it was British militarism but the cunning and, in a sense, deep characterlessness of the Secret Elite, which hoodwinked everyone and which worked outside and in contradiction with the constitution, and which lied to and shamelessly deceived everyone, created the opposite impression. When the Liberal leader Campbell-Bannerman won a landslide victory in 1906, the Liberals were committed to peace.

Edward Grey and Haldane were committed to war and along with other members of the Secret Elite, steering the country towards war. Cabinet was never informed of this, nor was the prime minister. The crafted biographies of men like Haldane contain lies and are unreliable. And if one reads Docherty and Macgregor they have exposed the lies in Haldane’s biography and private notes. In fact, there is evidence that Campbell-Bannerman was kept in the dark about the military contacts with other countries. His untimely death in 1908 relieved the Secret Elite of the pressure for a peaceful world! In fact, the Secret Elite were very worried soon afterwards, because in 1910, their key patron King Edward VII died at age 68, while the Liberals were still in power.

False propaganda about German military preparations was carried out at the behest of the Secret Elite in the British media. As Docherty and Macgregor put it (pp 134, 135, ref. [1])

From the beginning of the twentieth century, the Secret Elite indulged in a frenzy of rumor and half-truths, of raw propaganda and lies, to create the myth of a great naval race. The story widely accepted, even by many anti-war Liberals, was that Germany was preparing a massive fleet of warships to attack and destroy the British navy before unleashing a military invasion on the east coast of England or the Firth of Forth in Scotland. It was the stuff of conspiracy novels. But it worked. The British people swallowed the lie that militarism had run amok in Germany and the ‘fact’ that it was seeking world domination through military superiority. Militarism in the United Kingdom was of God, but in Germany of the Devil, and had to be crushed before it crushed them.”

These authors are quick to point out that when Germany was defeated and all their prewar records became available to the Allies, not a shred of evidence in favor of such secret plans to invade Britain were discovered. They point out that the statistics were thoroughly abused by an “almighty alliance of armaments manufacturers, political rhetoric, and newspaper propaganda” that conjured a frightening image of a German naval armada and the German will to dominate the world.

Rothschild and Ernest Cassel, who paid for the lechery of King Edward VII when he was a playboy Prince of Wales, were major owners of the largest armament factory Vickers. They point out that in the decade prior to war the British naval expenditure was £351.9 million whereas the German naval expenditure was £185.2 million, i.e. almost half of the British expenditure. Similarly, the Allies, i.e., the Triple Entente spent £675.88 million on warships in that same decade whereas Germany and Austro-Hungary spent £235.9 million, almost a third of what the Entente had spent, on their navies in the same period.

Generals Hindenburg and Ludendorff (R) lead Germany as virtual military dictators from mid-1916 to the end of the war

The German army was 7,61000 strong, the French and Russian armies had, respectively, 794,000 and 1.845 million personnel. So, where is the evidence of German militarism running amok? Who was running amok? Who was spending far more than the Germans? This lie of German military buildup has been perpetuated by establishment historians when the numbers speak out for themselves. The establishment historians should be ashamed at propagating lies and holding the so-called nonexistent German militarism responsible for the war. They have lied to, and continue to lie to their own people as well as the whole world. What a shame! The Germans should stand up with their heads high. They did not lie or deceive.

The sanitized history taught worldwide seems to hold Germany as the aggressor. This is utterly untrue as established by Docherty and Macgregor. Preparata also states in his fascinating book (published 2005) (p 14 of ref [3]):

“From the beginning Britain was the aggressor, not Germany.”

The Russian ambassador to France Isvolsky, who was an agent of the Secret Elite, sent a telegram to Moscow on August 1, 1914 (p 320, ref. [1]):

The French War Minister informed me, in hearty high spirits, that the Government have firmly decided on war, and begged me to endorse the hope of the French General Staff that all efforts will be directed against Germany…”

Germany did not order mobilization until 24 hours later! The Kaiser had sent a message to the Russian czar asking that Russia stop her military movements on her borders. The Kaiser waited for 24 hours without any reply before ordering mobilization. Docherty and Macgregor correctly observe that Germany was the last of the European powers to order mobilization. Does that indicate that Germany wanted war? It only indicates that Germany did her best to avoid war.

A detailed study of the interactions between the British leaders and the Germans and others during July and the first days of August reveals clearly that the British leaders were shamelessly lying to the Germans and deceiving them. Their conduct had descended to the level of common criminals and crooks.

The Germans conducted themselves with integrity and a degree of innocence. The Secret Elite had also advised the Russians and the French to mobilize to attack, but not actually attack Germany, because the British public would never support the aggressor in a European war. They wanted Germany, as Docherty and Macgregor put it, to “swallow the bait.” Britain had trapped Germany into a war, in collusion with Russia and France. Docherty and Macgregor write (p 321, ref. [1]):

What else could Germany have done? She was provoked into a struggle for life and death. It was a stark choice: await certain destruction or strike out to defend herself. Kaiser Wilhelm had exposed his country to grave danger and almost lost one precious advantage Germany had by delaying countermeasures to Russian mobilization in the forlorn hope of peace.”

When Germany declared war against France on August 3, 1914, the French Under-Secretary of State, Abel Ferry, noted in his diary (ref. [3], p 24):

The web was spun and Germany entered it like a great buzzing fly.”

The Illuminati international bankers and other secret society members of the British oligarchy had colluded together for a destruction of Christian Europe. Only the Zionist international bankers and their fellow “tribesmen” saw this outcome clearly – they had planned for it and the non-banking oligarchy was used. The lie parroted in standard history books that Germany bore the responsibility of the war is an utter and shameful lie. The responsibility of the war rested with the Secret Elite controlled British leadership.

Western Front WW1 British soldier

Zionism and the American Involvement

Almost two months before war broke out, on May 29, 1914, the Rothschild agent Col. House, who handled and controlled President Wilson, had written to him:

Whenever England consents, France and Russia will close in on Germany.”

It is well known that Col. Edward Mandel House was a Rothschild agent as was his father. Col. House played a diabolical role in prolonging World War I, and in dragging the U.S. into the World War. It is important to understand how influential he was with President Wilson. President Wilson had once referred to him as his alter ego. In his seminal book, that has sold over five million copies since it was first published, Gary Allen states [4]:

“Colonel” House was front man for the international banking fraternity. He manipulated President Wilson like a puppet. Wilson called him “my alter ego.” House played a major role in creating the Federal Reserve System, passing the graduated income tax and getting America into WWI. House’s influence over Wilson is an example that in the world of super-politics the real rulers are not always the ones the public sees.

Col. House represents a new phenomenon – the emergence of “advisors” to the U.S. President who do not hold any formal office, are unelected, and are intimately tied to the international banking families, apart from being members of secret societies. These advisors hold the president of the United States “captive.” In his profound book The Controversy of Zion, Douglas Reed, a Times (London) correspondent in Central Europe right up to the beginning of WW II, mentions that four men held President Wilson captive – Col. House, Rabi Stephen Wise, Justice Brandeis and Bernard Baruch. Reed states [5]:

Thus three out of the four men around President Wilson were Jews and all three, at one time or the other, played leading parts in the re-segregation of the Jews through Zionism and its Palestinian ambition ….

Such was the grouping around a captive president as the American Republic moved towards involvement in the First World War, and such was the cause which was to be pursued through him and his country’s involvement. After his election Mr. House took over his correspondence, arranged whom he should see or not receive, told cabinet officers what they were to say or not to say, and so on.

In order to understand how and why the preplanned WWI was prolonged it is important to know who influenced or controlled the elected leadership of the U.K. and the U.S. and what were the aims of these controllers. It is also important to know that Justice Louis Brandeis had founded a secret society by the name Parushim, for promoting Zionism in U.S.A. The initiate was asked to accept the following oath at a secret initiation ceremony [6] :

You are about to take a step which will bind you to a single cause for all your life. You will for one year be subject to an absolute duty whose call you will be impelled to heed at any time, in any place, and at any cost. And ever after, until our purpose shall be accomplished, you will be fellow of a brotherhood whose bond you will regard as greater than any other in your life – dearer than that of family, of school, of nation. By entering this brotherhood, you become a self-dedicated soldier in the army of Zion. Your obligation to Zion becomes your paramount obligation… It is the wish of your heart and of your own free will to join our fellowship, to share its duties, its tasks, and its necessary sacrifices.

Rabi Stephen Wise was on board regarding Parushim and, almost certainly, Bernard Baruch was also on board. Bernard Baruch’s connection with the international bankers is well known. It is also important to point out that the international bankers had planned World War I to, among other things, promote the Zionist cause. As Douglas Reed, using information provided in Chaim Weizmann’s book Trial and Error, stated in his book Far and Wide [7]:

The First World War began in 1914; long-memoried readers may recall that it appeared to be concerned with such matters as the rape of Belgium, ending Prussian militarism, and making the world safe for democracy. At its start Baron Edmond de Rothschild told Dr. Weizmann that it would spread to the Middle East, where things of great significance to Political Zionism would occur.

How did Edmond de Rothschild know right at the beginning of the war that the war would spread to the Middle East where things will work out to the great advantage of Political Zionism? He could only know this if it was planned that way and if he was one of the planners. And, as we will see, this was one of the reasons why World War I was deliberately prolonged.

Prolonging the War

The war was prolonged through several tactics. Firstly, all overtures of peace from the side of the Germans, and later the Ottomans, were defeated by agents of the international bankers. Secondly when Germans ran short of food, the deception named Belgian Relief Commission was set up by the international bankers through their front men, by which food was supplied to Germany and the German army, under guise of food supplies to Belgium, so that the German army could keep on fighting. Thirdly Germans were supplied with vital chemicals, metals, and other war materials by Allied Big Business, to enable them to keep fighting. Finally, wherever the Allied rulers seemed to resist the expansion of the war into the Middle East, they were eliminated politically, and if need be physically. They were then replaced by agents of the international banking cabal.

Sabotage of German Peace Offers of February 1915 and December 1916

A lone French soldier in a wet trench

Early in the war, on November 3, 1914, Britain declared the North Sea a theater of war. It blockaded ports of neutral countries illegally. On February 3, 1915, i.e. three months later, the Germans announced a counter blockade. They announced that with effect from February 18, 1915, the entire English channel along with territorial waters of Britain and Ireland would be considered a war zone. One must appreciate the fact that the Germans waited for three months before announcing a counter blockade. They were within their rights to do so.

However simultaneously, in February 1915, the Germans approached James W. Gerard, the U.S. ambassador in Germany, and expressed their desire to end the war. The German authorities wanted the ambassador to convey their desire for peace to President Wilson. They were however utterly unaware that President Wilson was a captive of the “advisors” installed around him by the international bankers. This German overture for peace is not something that is mentioned in textbooks but it has been mentioned by James W. Gerard in autobiography My First Eighty Three Years in America.

The response from Washington was most astonishing. Instead of commenting on the German proposal for peace, the White House directed the ambassador to communicate with Col. House instead of the President of U.S.A.! Dr. Stanley Montieth quotes from ambassador Gerard’s biography [8]:

In addition to the cable which I had already received informing me that Colonel House was “fully commissioned to act” he himself reminded me of my duty in his February 16 postscript. In his own handwriting these were the words from House. “The President has just repeated to me your cablegram to him and says he has asked you to communicate directly with me in future . . .” All authority, therefore had been vested in Colonel House direct, the President ceased to be even a conduit of communications. . . . He, who had never been appointed to any position, and who had never been passed by the Senate, was “fully instructed and commissioned” to act in the most grave situation. I have never ceased to wonder how he had managed to attain such power and influence.

One may notice that the German counter blockade was to begin on February 18, and the Germans communicated their desire for peace before that date as Colonel House’s handwritten postscript was dated February 16th. So it appears that the Germans expected that since the counter blockade represented an increased and new level of hostility, the Americans would be concerned to defuse the situation. They had no idea that Wilson was a stooge, a puppet in the hands of those who had planned a long war.

And one may recall that although the Archduke Ferdinand was assassinated as late as June 28, 1914, Col. House had, a month earlier, on May 29th, communicated to Wilson the arrangement that as soon as England indicated, France and Russia would pounce on Germany. So Colonel House wanted a long war, and destruction of both Germany and Russia, in accordance with the desire of the Zionist international bankers. Therefore, the ambassador never heard anything from Col. House about the peace proposal of February 1915. The peace proposal was sabotaged by Col. House.

Realizing that Col. House was in control of Wilson the Germans made another overture of peace in December 1916. This has been revealed by historian Leon Degrelle [9]. He mentions that on December 12, 1916, German officials expressed a desire for peace and talks with their adversaries. He also writes that Germans expressed the hope that Col. House would persuade the Allies. The freemason Col. House ruled out peace and thus helped sabotage the second peace initiative within the same year. The Germans did not know that Col. House had played an important role in precipitating the First World War by secretly entering into a secret agreement with Britain, well before Wilson’s re-election, that the U.S. would join the war, on the side of the Allies. Degrelle further writes [9]:

On December 18, 1916, U.S. ambassador to Britain, Walter H. Page, relayed a peace offer to the Allies from Germany, the Austro-Hungarian Empire, the Ottoman Empire, and Bulgaria. On January 9, 1917, Prime Minister Lloyd George quickly repudiated the offering and declared that Britain would fight to the victory, which possibly prompted the Germans to re-initiate submarine warfare. Ambassador Page, in touch with President Wilson and Secretary of State Robert Lansing, defended British policies. This was William Jenning Bryan’s resignation, after he described Britain’s collapsing financial situation and the need for America’s neutrality.

If the war had ended in 1916 million of lives could have been saved and destruction and devastation of numerous cities avoided. But the international bankers had planned a long war. It is important to note that, according to writer Juri Lina, who had access to records of numerous important Masonic lodges, Lloyd George was a Freemason, a Masonic Grand Master, and a Jew, whose real name was David Levi-Lowitt [10]. His connections with international bankers are very well known and he was installed in power as a result of an intrigue with the object of promoting the Zionist cause, as will be described later.

The picture of dead men among trees is a censored photo that was banned from publication by the French government. Those are dead Frenchmen mowed down by German guns during the Battle of the Frontiers in August/September 1914.

*

“Belgian Relief”

The next betrayal perpetrated by the international bankers took place in the form of the deception called Belgian Relief Commission. One finds many eulogized discussions about the work of this Commission. On the face of it this Commission was set up to supply food to the Belgian population. We quote below the typical version of the Belgian Relief Commission. It has been taken from an article by Elena S. Danielson that appeared in The United States in the First World War: An Encyclopedia, (edited by Anne Cipriano Venzon) [11]:

Herbert Hoover founded the Commission for Relief in Belgium (CRB) in London in October 1914 as a private organization to provide food for German-occupied Belgium. Belgium’s attempts at resistance to German military demands at the outbreak of the Great War had aroused much popular sympathy in England and the United States. A densely populated, industrialized country, Belgium depended on imports for three-quarters of its normal food supply. When the German Army began to requisition local foodstuffs and the British blockade cut off imported sources, 7 million Belgians faced severe hunger as the winter of 1914-1915 approached. When the American ambassador in London, Walter Hines Page, met with Belgian representatives, they concluded that Herbert Hoover was the best choice to administer some emergency relief action. The comprehensiveness of the program, however, was the result of Hoover’s personal determination to feed the entire nation.

But the real function, to which the Belgian Relief Commission was diverted, was hideous. Once Britain blockaded Germany, and the Germans were starved for food, the Belgian Relief Commission became a cover for sending food supplies to the German Army so that the German Army could keep on fighting. It may be useful to remember that Walter Hines Page was in the pay of Rothschilds. In his book The Secrets of the Federal Reserve Eustace Mullins writes [12]:

The U.S. Ambassador to Britain, Walter Hines Page, complained that he could not afford the position, and was given twenty-five thousand dollars a year spending money by Cleveland H. Dodge, president of the National City Bank. H.L. Mencken openly accused Page in 1916 of being a British agent, which was unfair. Page was merely a bankers’ agent.

The “City” banks were always owned by the Rothschilds. Mullins writes [13]:

The Belgian Relief Commission was organized by Emile Francqui, director of a large Belgian bank, Societe Generale, and a London mining promoter, an American named Herbert Hoover, who had been associated with Francqui in a number of scandals which had become celebrated court cases, notably the Kaiping Coal Company scandal in China, said to have set off the Boxer Rebellion, which had as its goal the expulsion of all foreign businessmen from China. Hoover had been barred from dealing on the London Stock Exchange because of one judgment against him, and his associate, Stanley Rowe, had been sent to prison for ten years. With this background, Hoover was called an ideal choice for a career in humanitarian work.

Further the truth about Hoover is given in the following words [14]:

Hoover had also carried out a number of mining operations in various parts of the world as a secret agent for the Rothschilds, and had been rewarded with a directorship on one of the principal Rothschild enterprises, the Rio Tinto Mines in Spain and Bolivia.

It may also be useful to remember that [15]:

Wilson’s academic career was financed by gifts from Cleveland H. Dodge, director of National City bank and Moses Taylor Payne, grandson and heir of the founder of the National City Bank. Wilson then signed an agreement not to go to any other college.

Please note that the same Cleveland Dodge was the financier of both, Ambassador Walter Hines Page, and President Wilson. Dodge was working for the Rothschilds. The first person to expose the hideous reality about the Belgian Relief Commission was a British nurse named Edith Cavell who was running a hospital in Belgium at the time. In his book Secrets of the Federal Reserve, first published in 1951, Eustace Mullins wrote about this [16]:

Franqui and Hoover threw themselves into the seemingly impossible task of provisioning Germany during World War I. Their success was noted in Nordeutsche Allegmeine Zeitung, March 13, 1915, which noted that large quantities of food were now arriving from Belgium by rail. Schmoller’s Yearbook for Legislation, Administration and Political Economy for 1916 shows that one billion pounds of meat, one and a half billion pounds of bread, and one hundred and twenty one million pounds of butter had been shipped from Belgium to Germany in that year.

Mullins then narrates the story of Edith Cavell (Ibid pp 72, 73):

A patriotic British woman who had operated a small hospital in Belgium for several years, Edith Cavell, wrote to Nursing Mirror in London, April 15, 1915, complaining that “Belgian Relief” supplies were being shipped to Germany to feed the German army. The Germans considered Miss Cavell to be of no importance, and paid no attention to her, but the British intelligence service in London was appalled by Miss Cavell’s discovery, and demanded that the Germans arrest her as a spy. Sir William Wiseman, head of British Intelligence, and partner of Kuhn Loeb Company, feared that the continuance of war was at stake, and secretly notified the Germans that Miss Cavell must be executed. The Germans reluctantly arrested her and charged her with aiding prisoners of war to escape. The usual penalty for this offence was three months imprisonment, but the Germans bowed to Sir William Wiseman’s demands, and shot Edith Cavell, thus creating one of the principal martyrs of the First World War.

It is to be noted that after the war Sir William Wiseman settled in the United States and became one of the directors of the Kuhn Loeb & Co. This was his reward for having helped prolong the war. It may be noted that the head of the German secret service was Max Warburg, another international banker, whose brother Paul Warburg had emigrated to the U.S. in 1902 and was instrumental, in 1913, in having the Federal Reserve Act passed. Paul Warburg was a partner in Kuhn Loeb & Co. The deeply hidden international banking connections are fairly obvious to anyone who cares to find out.

Thus the “Belgian Relief” was used to prolong the war. Had the war ended in February 1915 there would have been no Bolshevik Revolution (instigated and bankrolled by the international bankers) and the war would not have been extended to the Middle East. But the plan of the bankers who instigated the war was to prolong the war as long as possible and to fulfill, as far as possible, their targets (as revealed at the outset of the war by Edmond de Rothschild to Weizmann).

Zionists Sabotage a Separate Peace Possibility with the Ottomans

The Zionists defeated another opportunity of securing peace with the Ottoman Empire in May 1917. It was in May 1917 that the U.S. Secretary of State Robert Lansing received a report that the Ottomans were tired of war and a separate peace with Britain could be secured thereby isolating Germany. But the Zionists did not want to keep the Ottoman Empire intact – they wanted its complete destruction so that they could secure a Jewish homeland in Palestine from the rubble of the Ottoman Empire. The Zionists got wind of the plan when President Wilson assigned Henry J. Morgenthau the duty of contacting the Ottomans. Henry J. Morgenthau had once been the U.S. ambassador in Turkey. Morgenthau was himself Jewish and he therefore decided to take Felix Frankfurter with him.

As Alison Weir writes in her book [17], Felix Frankfurter was a “paid political lobbyist and lieutenant” of Justice Louis Brandeis. Now Justice Brandeis was a highly unscrupulous individual when it came to his political purposes – he could go to any length to achieve these. It is the same Justice Brandeis who had set up the secret society Parushim for promoting Zionism in U.S. clandestinely, as mentioned previously. He was also one of the four men who held President Wilson captive.

If the Ottomans had made a separate peace with Britain, the Ottoman Empire would have survived intact and there would be no room for Israel. Alison Weir states [18]:

Felix Frankfurter became part of the delegation and ultimately persuaded the delegation’s leader, former Ambassador Henry J. Morgenthau, to abandon the effort. U.S. State Department officials considered that Zionists had worked to scuttle this potentially peace-making mission and were unhappy about it. Zionists often construed such displeasure at their actions as evidence of American diplomats’ ‘anti-Semitism’.

Thus the Zionists, controlled by the international bankers, “killed” still another opportunity for peace which could have saved millions of lives.

Two Russian soldiers stand in front of a ruined building in NE Turkey and look at the remains of Armenians killed by the Turks, part of the 1.5 million Armenians killed during WW1 by the Turks.

*

Intrigue in Britain to Open Up a Front in Palestine

In his deep book, Douglas Reed, narrates [19]:

Opposition to Zionism developed from another source. In the highest places still stood men who thought only of national duty and winning the war. They would not condone “hatred” of a military ally or espouse a wasteful “sideshow” in Palestine. These men were Mr. Herbert Asquith (Prime Minister), Lord Kitchener (Secretary for War), Sir Douglas Haig (who became Commander-in-Chief in France), and Sir William Robertson (Chief-of-Staff in France, later of Chief of the Imperial Staff).

How did the Zionists get rid of this highest level opposition to opening up a front in Palestine? They decided to get rid of the Prime Minister and Lord Kitchener. It is almost unknown to the world that the Bolshevik Revolution was actually a Zionist coup in which the funding and support came from international bankers. The Zionist international bankers were mortal enemies of Russia because of the allegiance of the royal family to Christianity. Researchers have dug out this little known aspect of World War I. This aspect reveals the profound, utterly ruthless and absolutely single-minded pursuit of the goal of world domination by the international bankers. Reed describes how the Zionists were able to eliminate Lord Kitchener. He writes [20]:

Lord Kitchener was sent to Russia by Mr. Asquith in June 1916. The cruiser Hampshire, and Lord Kitchener in it, vanished. Good authorities concur that he was one man who might have sustained Russia. A formidable obstacle, both to the world-revolution there and to the Zionist enterprise, disappeared. Probably Zionism could not have been foisted upon the West, had he lived.

The silent and sinister physical elimination of Lord Kitchener has also been consigned to oblivion through controlled history writing. Had Kitchener managed to salvage Russia the Zionist enterprise would have been almost permanently thwarted. That is why he had to be eliminated. In an overall view of things the elimination of Lord Kitchener was vital for the survival of the Zionist enterprise and fits a pattern of intrigue in which assassinations and installation of puppet politicians was crucial. World War I was triggered by an assassination and prolonged by various tactics including the elimination of Lord Kitchener.

The elimination of Prime Minister Asquith has been looked into by Cornelius. He writes [21]:

Herbert Asquith, who had been prime minister since 1908, had begun, reluctantly, to consider a negotiated peace, but negotiations with the Zionists, through Weizmann and Balfour, provided another option for Britain, although not for Asquith. That option was the possibility of a formal, but secret, alliance between the Zionists and the Monarchy, whereby the British Monarchy would undertake to facilitate the establishment of a Jewish state in Palestine and the Zionists would undertake to help bring America into the war on the side of the Allies, this assuring an Allied victory. An agreement with a British government would certainly be necessary, but British governments come and go, and a commitment from something less ephemeral than a British government would have been required by the Zionists. It is proposed that such an agreement took place. There seems to be no way to date it accurately but it seems likely to have occurred sometime around in October 1916.

Cornelius writes further:

In early December 1916, a political crisis, probably engineered, occurred in Britain, and Herbert Asquith, was forced to resign. The denouement came on Dec. 6, 1916. That afternoon King George V summoned several prominent political figures, including Balfour and Lloyd David, to a conference at Buckingham Palace. Later that same evening, Balfour received a small political delegation, which proposed that the difficult situation could be resolved with Lloyd George as prime minister, provided Balfour would agree to accept the position of foreign minister, which he did.

The Zionists thus eliminated Asquith, who did not wish to open a front in the Middle East for furtherance of the Zionist ambitions there. In his place they installed Lloyd David George, a Zionist, a Freemason and a man who worked for the international bankers. This was an odd situation – Balfour, who had been a Prime Minister from 1902 – 1905, had agreed to work as Foreign Minister of a far junior politician.

What concerns were so pressing that made Lord Balfour accept a junior position? Lord Balfour had long been inducted in the larger Secret Elite circle and was simply carrying out what the Secret Elite wanted him to do as part of their plans. It could only be the pressure of the Zionist international bankers with reference to the opening up of a military front in the Middle East and establishing a Jewish homeland in Palestine.

Lest anyone has any doubts about who steered the policy when Lloyd David George became Prime Minister, it would be sufficient to look at the following statement in A.N. Field’s 1936 book, All These Things, in which he quotes a passage from the French book La Mystification des Peuples Allies authored by Andre Cheradame [22]:

For some years a group of financiers whose families, for the most part, are of German-Jewish origin, has assumed control of political power and exerts a predominant influence over Mr. Lloyd George. The Monds, the Sassoons, Rufus Isaacs those known as the representatives of the international banking interests, dominate Old England, own its newspapers, and control its elections. The close solidarity existing between Mr. Lloyd George and Jewish high finance is easily shown by the brief biographical sketches of some of the influential personages by whom he is surrounded . . . Each of the names represents not only an individual, but also a veritable tribe and head of immense financial interests.

So the international bankers assumed control of the British government at the highest level by eliminating Prime Minister Asquith and Lord Kitchener, the former politically and the latter physically. Docherty and Macgregor have pointed out that the Secret Elite “identified and nurtured malleable politicians” across Europe and at home. They write (p 170, ref. [1]):

Lloyd George’s love of good life and his insatiable sexual appetite rendered him vulnerable. His career could have ended several times over had the Secret Elite chosen to destroy him. Instead, they protected his reputation, defending him against damaging allegations and saved his career.”

Since 1910 Lloyd George had been in the “pocket of the Secret Elite.” What happened when Lloyd George became Prime Minister? This is best described by Douglas Reed who has rendered an invaluable service to mankind by writing his last book. He writes [23]:

The simultaneous triumph of Bolshevism in Moscow and Zionism in London in the same week of 1917 were only in appearance distinct events. The identity of the original source has been shown in an earlier chapter, and the hidden men who promoted Zionism through the Western governments also supported the world-revolution. The two forces fulfilled correlative tenets of the ancient Law: “Pull down and destroy . . . rule over all nations”; the one destroyed in the East and the other secretly ruled in the West.

Reed further narrates that after the assumption of power by Lloyd David George the cabinet began pressing the army for opening up a front in the Middle East. The armed forces resisted this strategically senseless pressure. But the change of government had been wrought by the international bankers, the Rothschilds, only for one purpose, the purpose of promoting the cause of political Zionism, as revealed at the outset of war by Edmond de Rothschild to Weizmann. John Reed quotes Sir William Robertson (emphasis in original) [24]:

Up to December 1916, operations beyond the Suez Canal were purely defensive in principle, the government and General Staff alike . . . recognizing the paramount importance of the struggle in Europe in need of give the armies there the utmost support. This unanimity between ministers and the soldiers did not obtain after the premiership changed hands . . . The fundamental difference of opinion was particularly obtrusive in the case of Palestine . . . The General Staff put the requirements at three additional divisions and these could only be obtained from the armies on the Western Front . . . The General Staff said the project would prove a great source of embarrassment and injure our prospects of success in France . . . These conclusions were disappointing to Ministers, who wished to see Palestine occupied at once, but they could not be refuted . . .

This clearly shows that there was a difference of opinion between the government and the General Staff regarding the issue of sending British troops to occupy Palestine. Sir William Robertson was one of the four men, mentioned previously by Reed, who held British interests supreme and stood in the way of the expansion of war into Palestine.

Shipment of War- and Food-materials to Germany Despite Blockade

The international bankers, who also controlled Big Business, were able to prolong the war by supplying much needed materials, such as chemicals, copper, zinc, etc., as well as food to Germany through neutral countries, thereby helping Germany to fight longer. The major neutral countries were Denmark, Norway Sweden, and Netherlands. Finland was also part of the chain of nations supplying materials to the Germans. This is another little known aspect of World War I (and also World War II). This policy of trading with the enemy to make profits and to prolong the war was also utilized in the Second World War.

It is not that sentient and patriotic journalists and analysts were unable to fathom the international-bankers’ intrigue at that time – rather it was the overall control of media, and of book publishing, that has made it possible for the international bankers to deceive generations with controlled information and sanitized history which omits their hideous role. The story was brought out by journalists and analysts in England during the course of World War I, and subsequently by Admiral M.W.W.P. Consett, who was posted as naval attaché in Denmark during the war. Scandinavia was, of course, a traditional “listening post for warring nations.” In the year 1923 Consett wrote a book with a very interesting title, The Triumph of Unarmed Forces (1914-1918). Consett writes [25]:

Our trade with Scandinavia was conducted and justified on the accepted security of guarantees that Germany should not benefit by it: here it is sufficient to say that the security was worthless.

As he writes in a previous paragraph (p x):

But from the very beginning goods poured into Germany from Scandinavia, and for over two years Scandinavia received from the British Empire and the Allied countries, stocks which, together with those from neutral countries, exceeded all previous quantities and literally saved Germany from starvation.

Consett has given several tables that indicate that the amount of various items that were imported into Germany during the period 1913-1917. Please note that war broke out in August 1914. The total food imported into Germany from Sweden in the years 1913, 1914, 1915, 1916, 1917 was, respectively (in metric tons): 252 128, 262376, 561,234, 620,756, and 315,205 (Appendix VI, p 298). Please note that food imports from Sweden in 1917 were more than food imports from that country in 1913. The food items covered in these figures are “meat of all sorts, fish, dairy produce, eggs, lard, margarine.” The food items do not include “vegetable oils, beer, fish, oil, bone fat, coffee, tea, cocoa, horses, syrup and glucose, fruit, vegetables.” This was despite the naval blockade imposed by Britain. The corresponding figures for Denmark follow a similar pattern. No wonder a Danish naval officer wrote (p 295 of Consett’s book) to his British counterparts:

I cannot help saying to you how much we Danish naval officers sympathize with you in having to live as you do amongst these people who are making fortunes in supplying your enemies with food when the officers and men of the Navy to which you belong are risking their lives in trying to blockade your enemies.

The story of Germany acquiring other items – much needed coal, vital lubricants, metals such as zinc, copper, nickel, etc. arrived at German ports through Scandinavian countries. The details have been provided by Consett in various chapters of his book. For instance on p 180 of his book, Consett quotes the U.S. ambassador James W. Gerard as having recorded the following his diary [26]:

Probably the greatest need of Germany is lubricating oil for machines.”

And yet lubricating oil did reach Germany from Scandinavian countries, as described by Consett. In fact Consett mentions that Ludendorff admitted:

Lubricants provided us with some of our greatest problems . . .

Similarly, other materials needed for explosives also arrived in Germany from Denmark and Holland despite the blockade. That the laxity in the blockade was intentional will become evident shortly. Consett states [27]:

These oils and fats, both vegetable and animal, are used in normal times principally for food, soap, candles, lubricants and fuel; but in war time their importance is much enhanced on account of the glycerin which they contain.

Glycerin is used in explosives and in 1915 Germany had discovered a process for extracting glycerin from sugar. This secret process was revealed only after the war. So important is glycerin that during the war the British Army collected all scraps of meat carefully in the British war zone, so that the fat could be used for extraction of glycerin.

That the British government was complicit in allowing vital materials to be shipped to Germany is evident from the following, which was revealed by Arnold White, a British journalist. In a packed meeting held at the Queen’s Hall London on March 4, 1917, Arnold White was speaker. According to A.N. Field, Arnold White [28]:

. . . referred at length to the mysterious way in which Britain had allowed an extension of Norwegian territorial waters from the customary three miles accepted internationally to a four-mile limit. This extra mile allowed great American ships to slip through immune Norwegian waters with 10,000-ton cargoes of ore to Germany. He had enquired into this matter and he found that the political heads understood nothing of significance of the extension of Norwegian territorial waters to which Britain had consented. Those who instigated it, in Mr. White’s opinion, knew exactly what it meant. But for that extension he added, “it would have been impossible for the great American ships to have carried 100,000 tons of ores last year into Germany.

What is difficult to understand about such matters that the politicians could not understand? One is reminded of the famous line by Upton Sinclair:

It is difficult to make a man understand when his salary depends upon not understanding it.

It is quite clear that the British government allowed the extension of Norwegian territorial waters deliberately. The politicians were working for the international bankers, led by the Rothschilds. The government of David Lloyd George had been installed in power by them through intrigue, and possibly murder of Lord Kitchener that may have been made to look like drowning or disappearance of the cruiser Hampshire, to further their own Zionist interests. According to A.N. Field:

. . . Mr. Lloyd George had been among other things solicitor to the Zionist organization in England. In December 1916, Mr. Lloyd George succeeded Mr. Asquith as Prime Minister, holding office until October 1922. Throughout the greater part of his career Mr. Lloyd George had close Jewish associations, and the pronounced Jewish complexion of the Lloyd George Ministries was more than once subject of Press comment in Britain.

Nine days later, on March 13, 1917, questions were asked in the House of Commons regarding the extension of territorial waters of Norway. The answer was that the government would do nothing about it.

The March 4, 1917 meeting had been organized by Dr. Ellis Powell, editor of the London Financial News. In this meeting Dr. Powell pointed out to the mysterious continuation of the activities of international bankers in Britain. This meeting was one of a series of meetings addressed by Dr. Powell and others, who had been agitating for exposing the “Hidden Hand” that was in control of Britain, and was betraying British interests. In fact, in 1917, Arnold White had written a book with title The Hidden Hand. The “Hidden Hand” was none other than the international bankers. The banks being run by bankers of German-Jewish origin in Britain were involved in activities that needed investigation. A resolution was passed at the March 4, 1917 meeting by all those present, numbering several thousand. They unanimously demanded closure of German banks in London. Field writes further [29]:

In seconding the resolution Dr. Ellis Powell, while seconding the resolution declared that German banks in the city were part of a vast organization of betrayal. The great outstanding fact of the war-time Hidden Hand agitation is that whenever it came to mention names and specific instances the names were mainly Jewish.

The Russian revolution is relevant to WW1 – this 1919 poster was printed by the White Russians and depicts Trotsky as an evil Jew. Bottom right are Asiatic soldiers of the Red army executing a European Russian

In his speeches Dr. Powell had attacked Jacob Schiff by name as being behind activities that went against British interests. Schiff was the owner of the Kuhn Loeb & Co, who had also bankrolled the Bolshevik movement. Jacob Schiff was born in the same house where the founder of the Rothschild family was born. Dr. Powell also mentioned Schroder, a naturalized British citizen, a banker of German-Jewish extraction, as well as others.

It is therefore quite clear that the international bankers were behind all major attempts at prolonging the war. They not only surrounded the British Prime Minister and the U.S. President, but all surrounded the German Chancellor. They were all Zionists and Freemasons.

It is important to keep track of the dates because this enables a better overall comprehension of what was going on. The German peace proposals of February 1915 and December 1916 were sabotaged.

It was in December 1916 that Asquith was toppled, it was in February 1917 that the Russian Czar abdicated, it was in April 1917 that the U.S.A. entered the war, it was during, and soon after May 1917, that the Ottoman peace possibility was destroyed by the Zionists, it was in October 1917, that the agents of the international bankers, the Bolsheviks, took over Russia and it was in November 1917, that the Balfour Declaration, addressed to Baron Rothschild, was formally issued.

All these events were manipulated by Zionist international bankers and their Illuminati controlled freemasonic brethren who had planned and intrigued on a global scale for a very long time. These epochal victories of the Illuminati Zionist international bankers have since dictated the course of history right up to today.

The global turmoil is a continuation of the Zionist thrust for seizing world power and they have come very close to their target with the destruction of U.S.S.R., Yugoslavia, Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan and the ongoing destruction of Syria, and with clouds over Saudi Arabia, Yemen, and Pakistan. “Pull down and destroy . . . rule over all nations”! The United States of America and the United Kingdom are the biggest tools in the hands of international bankers. Despite their profound strengths these two countries have, on account of their control by Zionist and Illuminati international bankers, become the greatest threat to the very survival of the human species at this point in time.

Henry Makow Ph.D., himself Jewish, and full of anger at the anti-mankind policies of the Zionist international bankers, sums up World War I [30]:

As mysteriously as it began, the war ended. In Dec. 1918, the German Empire suddenly “collapsed.” You can guess what happened. The banksters had achieved their aims and shut off the spigot. (Hence, the natural sense of betrayal felt in Germany, exacerbated by the onerous reparations dictated by the banksters at Versailles.)

What were the banksters’ aims? The Old Order was destroyed. Four empires (Russian, German, Austro-Hungarian and Ottoman) lay in ruins.

The banksters had set up their Bolshevik go-fers in Russia. (They sponsor many “revolutionary” movements as a way to eventually control all property themselves.) They ensured that Palestine would become a “Jewish” state under their control. Israel would be a perennial source of new conflict.

But more important, thanks to bloodbaths such as Verdun (800,000 dead), the optimistic spirit of Christian Western Civilization, Faith in Man and God, were dealt a mortal blow. The flower of the new generation was slaughtered. (See “The Testament of Youth” by Vera Brittain for a moving first-hand account.)”

Almost forty million humans died in World War I [31].

REFERENCES and NOTES

[1] Gerry Docherty and Jim Macgregor: Hidden History: The Secret Origins of the First World War; Mainstream Publishers, 2013

[2] Carol White: The New Dark Ages Conspiracy: Britain’s Plot to Destroy Civilization; The New Benjamin Franklin House Publishing Co, 1980

[3] Guido G. Preparata: Conjuring Hitler: How Britain and America Made the Third Reich, Pluto Press 2005, p 24.

[4] Gary Allen: None Dare Call It Conspiracy, first published 1971; 2013 edition published by Dauphin Publications Inc., p 52.

[5] Douglas Reed: The Controversy of Zion, Bridger House Publishers Inc. 2012, p 242; emphasis added.

The story of Douglas Reed illustrates how the international bankers and their agents suppress truth and promote a sanitized history. In a book Far and Wide, Douglas Reed had dared to put the American History in its true European context. Ivor Benson writes in the Preface to The Controversy of Zion:

In Europe during the war years immediately before and after World War II the name of Douglas Reed was on everyone’s lips; his books were being sold by scores of thousand, and he was known with intimate familiarity throughout the English-speaking world by a vast army of readers and admirers. Former London Times correspondent in Central Europe, he won great fame with books like Insanity Fair, Disgrace Abounding, Lest We Regret, Somewhere South of Suez, Far and Wide, and several others, each amplifying a hundredfold the scope available to him as one of the world’s leading foreign correspondents.

The disappearance into almost total oblivion of Douglas Reed and all his works was a change that could not have been wrought by time alone; indeed the correctness of his interpretation of the unfolding history of the times found some confirmation after what happened to him at the height of his powers.

After 1951, with the publication of Far and Wide, in which he set the history of the United States of America into the context of all he had learned in Europe of the politics of the world, Reed found himself banished from the bookstands, all publishers’ doors closed to him, and those books already published liable to be withdrawn from library shelves and “lost”, never to be replaced.”

This is how knowledge of history is controlled, distorted and even fabricated by the One World cabal of international bankers.

[6] Sarah SchmidtThe Parushim: A Secret Episode in American Zionist History;

American Jewish Historical Quarterly, Sep 1975-Jun 1976; 65. l – 4; AJHS Journal pg. 121.

[7] Douglas Reed: Far and Wide; first printed 1951; Angriff Pr June 1, 1981; part 2, chapter 2.

[8] Dr. Stanley Montieth: Brotherhood of Darkness, Bible Belt Publishing, Oklahoma City, U.S.A., 2000, p 65.

[9] Leon Degrelle: Hitler: Born at Versailles, Vol I, Institute for Historical Review, Torrance, California, 1992, p 255 – 259; cited by Deanna Spingola: The Ruling Elite: The Zionist Seizure of World Power, Trafford Publishing 2012, pp 622, 923

[10] Juri Lina: Architects of Deception, Referent Publishing 2004, chapter 7.

[11] See http://socialarchive.iath.virginia.edu/xtf/view?docId=commission-for-relief-in-belgium-1914-1930-cr.xml

[12] Eustace Mullins: The Secrets of the Federal Reserve: The London Connection; first published 1951; the 1991 edition by Bridger House publishing, p 83.

[13] Ibid, pp 69, 70.

[14] Ibid p 72.

[15] Eustace Mullins: The World Order: A Study in the Hegemony of Parasitism, published by Ezra Pound Institute of Civilization, 1985

[16] Ref 11, p 72

[17] Alison Weir: Against Our Better Judgment: the hidden history of how the U.S. was used to create Israel; 2014, p 9.

[18] Ibid p 22.

[19] Ref. 5, p 247.

[20] Ibid p 248.

[21] John Cornelius: The Hidden History of the Balfour Declaration; Washington Report on Middle East Affairs;

http://www.wrmea.org/2005-november/special-report-the-hidden-history-of-the-balfour-declaration.html

[22] A.N. Field: All These Things, 1936, p 82.

[23] Ref 5, p 272

[24] Ref 5, p 252

[25] M.W.W.P. Consett: Triumph of Unarmed Forces (1914-1918), Williams and Norgate, London, 1923; p xi.

[26] Ibid p 180.

[27] Ibid p 167.

[28] Ref. 22, p 42.

[29] Ref. 22, p 42.

[30] Henry Makow : Bankers Extended WWI By Three Years; revised and reposted December 1, 2007, http://www.henrymakow.com/001583.html

[31] Ref. 15.

*

Related Posts:



 
The views expressed herein are the views of the author exclusively and not necessarily the views of VT, VT authors, affiliates, advertisers, sponsors, partners, technicians, or the Veterans Today Network and its assigns. LEGAL NOTICE - COMMENT POLICY

 
Posted by on August 1, 2017, With 1863 Reads Filed under Of Interest, World War I (1914-1918). You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.
 

 
 

aceBook Comments

8 Responses to "How and Why WWI Was Planned and Prolonged

AUGUST 1-2017

H.F.1269

 
 BROUGHT-Forward from July-2011

VIGILANCE IS THE ORDER OF THE DAY!

*

 QUOTE 684 of 900

ABOUT THE PROTOCOLS

Jewish objectives as outlined in Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion:

1) Banish God from the heavens and Christianity from the earth.

2) Allow no private ownership of property or business.

3) Abolish marriage, family and home. Encourage sexual promiscuity, homosexuality, adultery, and fornication.

4) Completely destroy the sovereignty of all nations and every feeling or expression of patriotism.

5) Establish a one-world government through which the Luciferian Illuminati elite can rule the world. All other objectives are secondary to this one supreme purpose.

6) Take the education of children completely away from the parents. Cunningly and subtly lead the people thinking that compulsory school attendance laws are absolutely necessary to prevent illiteracy and to prepare children for better positions and life's responsibilities. Then after the children are forced to attend the schools get control of normal schools and teacher's colleges and also the writing and selection of all text books.

7) Take all prayer and Bible instruction out of the schools and introduce pornography, vulgarity, and courses in sex. If we can make one generation of any nation immoral and sexy, we can take that nation.

8) Completely destroy every thought of patriotism, national sovereignty, individualism, and a private competitive enterprise system.

9) Circulate vulgar, pornographic literature and pictures and encourage the unrestricted sale and general use of alcoholic beverage and drugs to weaken and corrupt the youth.

10) Foment, precipitate and finance large scale wars to emasculate and bankrupt the nations and thereby force them into a one-world government.

11) Secretly infiltrate and control colleges, universities, labor unions, political parties, churches, patriotic organizations, and governments. These are direct quotes from their own writings (The Conflict of the Ages, by Clemens Gaebelein pp. 100-102).

12) The creation of a World Government.

KGB CHART NOW TO DESTROY A PEOPLE AND NATION

More!

BROUGHT-FORWARD FROM

JULY-2011

See how so many of the aims of the PROTOCALS in JULY 2017 have been achieved in our schools and in our society.

 

JULY 24,2017

H.F.1262

Friday, June 23, 2017

WATCH: Lord Rothschild Explains How His Family Embraced Zionism, Created Israel

 

(
Jay Syrmopoulos) The head of the Rothschild banking empire, and staunch supporter of Israel, Lord Jacob Rothschild, recently revealed the critical role of his family in the securing the Balfour Declaration, which “helped pave the way for the creation of Israel.”

Related
The Sabbatean-Frankist Cult -- The Satanic Infiltration of the Western World
 
Source - The Free Thought Project

by
Jay Syrmopoulos, June 21st, 2017

The Balfour Declaration, written in 1917, was an official document from the British Foreign Minister, Lord Balfour, addressed to Lord Rothschild, a leader of the Zionist movement in Britain at the time – and Lord Jacob Rothschild’s uncle.

During the television interview with Rothschild, he revealed new details about the extremely pivotal role his cousin Dorothea de Rothschild played. Rothschild described Dorothea, who was in her teens at the time, as “devoted to Israel,” and said: ‘What she did was crucially important.’”

Rothschild went on to say that Dorothy acted as a conduit between Zionist leader Chaim Weizmann and the British political establishment. Dorothy “told Weizmann how to integrate, how to insert himself into British establishment life, which he learned very quickly,” according to Rothschild.

Rothschild explained that the manner in which the declaration was procured was extraordinary.


“It was the most incredible piece of opportunism,” he reasoned.

“[Weizmann] gets to Balfour,” Rothschild described, “and unbelievably, he persuades Lord Balfour, and Lloyd George, the prime minister, and most of the ministers, that this idea of a national home for Jews should be allowed to take place. I mean it’s so, so unlikely.”

This extremely revealing interview with Lord Rothschild was conducted by former Israeli ambassador Daniel Taub as part of the Balfour 100 project, commemorating the 100-year anniversary of the Balfour Declaration. The interviewed took place at Waddesdon Manor in Buckinghamshire, a manor bequeathed to the nation by the Rothschild family in 1957, where the Declaration is stored.

According to Ambassador Taub, the Balfour Declaration “changed the course of history for the Middle East.”

Rothschild said his family at the time was divided on the idea of Israel, noting that some members “didn’t think it was a good thing that this national home be established there.”

Dorothea’s letters are also stored at Waddesdon, and describe her subsequent dealings with a variety of Zionist leaders, as well as her advice on the organization of the Zionist Conference, according to the Times.

othschild said that the Declaration went through five separate drafts before finally being formally issued on November 2, 1917.

In her book, Against Our Better Judgment: The Hidden History of How the U.S. Was Used to Create Israel, Alison Weir exposed the fact that numerous drafts of the declaration were presented to Zionists in the United States prior to the document being finalized.

Weir’s book notes that one of the primary inducements offered to British leaders to issue the Balfour Declaration was the Zionist claim that they would bring the U.S. into world war I on Britain’s side if the British would promise to enable the Zionist colonization of Palestine.

Balfour Declaration Text:
 
Foreign Office
November 2nd, 1917
Dear Lord Rothschild,

I have much pleasure in conveying to you. on behalf of His Majesty’s Government, the following declaration of sympathy with Jewish Zionist aspirations which has been submitted to, and approved by, the Cabinet.

His Majesty’s Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavors to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.

I should be grateful if you would bring this declaration to the knowledge of the Zionist Federation.
Yours,

Arthur James Balfour

The deeply intertwined relationship between modern Zionism and the Rothschild banking empire cannot be overstated. Without the Rothschild family’s vast influence and direct assistance, Israel very well may have never been created.

About The Author

Jay Syrmopoulos


Jay Syrmopoulos is an geopolitical analyst, freethinker, and ardent opponent of authoritarianism. He is currently a graduate student at the University of Denver pursuing a masters in Global Affairs and holds a BA in International Relations. Jay's writing has been featured on both mainstream and independent media - and has been viewed tens of millions of times. You can follow him on Twitter @SirMetropolis and on Facebook at SirMetropolis. You can support his work at Patreon.

_________________________
Stillness in the Storm Editor's note: Did you find a spelling error or grammar mistake? Do you think this article needs a correction or update? Or do you just have some feedback? Send us an email at sitsshow@gmail.com with the error, headline and url. Thank you for reading.
 
________________________________________________________________
Question -- What is the goal of this website? Why do we share different sources of information that sometimes conflicts or might even be considered disinformation? 
Answer -- The primary goal of Stillness in the Storm is to help all people become better truth-seekers in a real-time boots-on-the-ground fashion. This is for the purpose of learning to think critically, discovering the truth from within—not just believing things blindly because it came from an "authority" or credible source. Instead of telling you what the truth is, we share information from many sources so that you can discern it for yourself. We focus on teaching you the tools to become your own authority on the truth, gaining self-mastery, sovereignty, and freedom in the process. We want each of you to become your own leaders and masters of personal discernment, and as such, all information should be vetted, analyzed and discerned at a personal level. We also encourage you to discuss your thoughts in the comments section of this site to engage in a group discernment process. 

 
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." – Aristotle
 

 
The opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of Stillness in the Storm, the authors who contribute to it, or those who follow it. 

 
View and Share our Images
Curious about Stillness in the Storm? 
See our About this blog - Contact Us page.

If it was not for the gallant support of readers, we could not devote so much energy into continuing this blog. We greatly appreciate any support you provide!

 
We hope you benefit from this not-for-profit site 

 
It takes hours of work every day to maintain, write, edit, research, illustrate and publish this blog. We have been greatly empowered by our search for the truth, and the work of other researchers. We hope our efforts 
to give back, with this website, helps others in gaining 
knowledge, liberation and empowerment.

 
"There are only two mistakes one can make along the road to truth; 
not going all the way, and not starting." — Buddha

 
If you find our work of value, consider making a Contribution.
This website is supported by readers like you. 

 
[Click on Image below to Contribute]

 

*  *  *

[This information has been known almost from the day of its implementation-WE understand that the bribe was the urgent supply of scarce explosive material-needed for the guns on the WESTERN FRONT in 1916- WORLD WAR 1-WE mentioned this fact on our website decades ago.]

Sayings of the Rothschild family in the 19th and 20th century
 

[COMMENTS IN BRACKETS ARE OURS!]

H.F.1232

 

DOMINIC LAWSON: Why pompous Milburn is so wrong about Britain's haves and have nots

Jumped before he was pushed: Alan Milburn presented his departure as 'social mobility tsar' as a resignation on a matter of principle despite the fact his term had come to an end

How strange it is that Alan Milburn should routinely have been described as the Government's 'social mobility tsar', a grandiose title to which he never objected.

After all, the Russian tsar was the apex of a system of absolute social hierarchy. Now our social mobility 'tsar' has abdicated, protesting that the Government is doing nothing to bring about the more equal country that the Social Mobility Commission was designed to support.

In fact Milburn's abdication is no more voluntary than that of Tsar Nicholas II, 100 years ago. As Justine Greening, the Education Secretary, pointed out yesterday, he'd been doing the job for five years 'and his term had come to an end'.

In other words, Milburn jumped before he was pushed, and presented it as a resignation on a matter of principle.

In one respect, Milburn really did enjoy the status of a tsar: his pronouncements as chairman of the Social Mobility Commission were always accorded complete reverence — not least on the BBC — and were never subjected to any sort of critical review.

When this quango was launched in 2012 by the then coalition top team of David Cameron and Nick Clegg (largely, I suspect, because both men were embarrassed by their own exclusively private education and wealthy backgrounds), Milburn declared: 'We live in a country, where, invariably, if you're born poor, you die poor.'

He repeated this on many occasions — and was never challenged on it by his many TV and radio interviewers.

But it is — and was — completely untrue. Even the Sutton Trust, an organisation dedicated to the cause of increasing the life-chances of the less well-off, has produced research completely refuting Milburn's central proposition.

Feared

Its most recent analysis, dividing society into quartiles by income, revealed that 62 per cent of sons born to fathers in the bottom income quartile, themselves escaped into the higher three quartiles.

 

Education Secretary Justine Greening pointed out on the Andrew Marr show that Alan Milburn jumped before he was pushed from the role

Moreover, as you would expect, there was social movement (as defined by income) in the opposite direction.

Only 42 per cent of sons born to fathers from the top income bracket managed to retain that position in the highest income quartile — and 16 per cent of those born in the top income category slid all the way to the bottom.

So why did Milburn get away with it? Well, the Conservatives didn't dare criticise him because they feared — especially under David Cameron — that they would be seen as defending 'elitism'. And for Labour, Milburn's position was pleasantly in accord with their own claim that only a Labour government would represent 'the many, not the few'.

Funnily enough, it is within the Labour party — of which the former Cabinet minister Milburn is still a member — that there has been an actual retreat in working-class success.

In 1964, 37 per cent of Labour MPs were from a family background of manual work; by 2015 that figure had plunged to just 7 per cent.

 

David Cameron's government dare not criticise Milburn because they feared that they would be seen as defending 'elitism'

This process is even accentuated by its current leader, Jeremy Corbyn, as the resoundingly middle-class socialist pressure group Momentum tightens its hold on the selection process.

Ludicrous

On Saturday, the Mail reported 'Labour insiders' as saying that the son of a miner, Kieran Harpham, had been de-selected as a Sheffield councillor because he was 'too authentically working-class' and 'not Left-wing enough': he has been replaced by Janet Ridler, a historian from Sheffield's wealthiest suburb, Dore.

To be fair to Alan Milburn, he is far from a Corbyn fan. He is, to the contrary, a Blairite. And, echoing his former boss, Milburn presented Brexit as a curse on British society, which must somehow be lifted. 'Tough on Brexit, tough on the causes of Brexit,' was Milburn's ludicrous slogan yesterday — which is as much as to say that he thinks the British people's decision to leave the EU was nothing less than a crime.

He went on to argue, confusingly, that if Theresa May didn't do what he said about social mobility, she would be 'betraying the families who voted for Brexit'.

His claim, such as it is, seems to be that those who voted to leave the EU did so as a protest against the nation's lack of social mobility, and its alleged adverse effect on their living standards.

It is an assertion both presumptuous and pompous, based on no evidence. If anything, the pro-Brexit vote in the Labour heartlands was one in favour of greater social cohesion, and against the form of mobility defined by the EU's absolute guarantee of freedom of movement.

Milburn's ludicrous 'tough on Brexit, tough on the causes of Brexit,' slogan suggests that he thinks the British people's decision to leave the EU is nothing less than a crime

The consequent unchecked level of immigration into the UK had many benefits, but the influx of millions of Europeans to work in this country also had a depressing effect on the wages of the unskilled. Such voters would, more likely, argue that the only way Mrs May could 'betray' them over Brexit would be to do what Mr Milburn wants and keep Britain inside the Single Market (which mandates freedom of movement).

But what is it, above anything else, which enables those from less well-off homes to have a chance of prosperity? A first-class quality of free education and the prospect of regular employment at the end of it. By both these measures, Britain has actually been upping its game — and it has nothing to do with Mr Milburn's Social Mobility Commission.

Employment rates have been rising, for year after year, and the proportion of families without anyone in paid work has (thankfully) gone in the opposite direction — down. The latter has much to do with the benefit reforms pioneered by Iain Duncan Smith.

His colleague, Michael Gove, was also instrumental, as Education Secretary, in driving up standards in state schools by demanding a greater level of rigour in both teaching and examinations.

The result of this has been a narrowing of the quality gap — and public exam outcomes — between state schools and private schools.

Again, this was no thanks to the Social Mobility Commission. It had nothing useful to say about improving the standards of teaching, and instead advocated lowering standards of entry at our top universities to those from the poorest homes. What a counsel of despair.

Of course we are an unequal society. As are all societies in all nations, always. But despite the self-serving cliches of the Left, last year in the UK income inequality — defined as the gap between the earnings of the richest and the poorest — fell to its lowest level since 1986.

Benefit reforms pioneered by Iain Duncan Smith, left, and the drive to improve standards in state schools by his colleague Michael Gove had nothing to do with Mr Milburn's Social Mobility Commission

And, as the Chancellor Philip Hammond pointed out in his Budget speech a fortnight ago, since 2010 the incomes of the poorest 10 per cent have grown faster, proportionately, than the richest 10 per cent.

Obsessed

It's true that we are in a long period of earnings stagnation: but this applies across the developed world. And it is simply not the case that Britain is at the bottom of the international league table in terms of social mobility.

We are probably more obsessed with class than any other nation, and accent still plays too much of a role in the way we treat each other.

But as Peter Saunders, emeritus professor of sociology at Sussex University explained in his recent Civitas pamphlet, Social Mobility Delusions: 'Social mobility is the norm in Britain, not the exception, and it covers the range from top to bottom. Politicians say our social mobility rate is one of the lowest in the Western world, but studies of class mobility put Britain around the middle of the international rankings.

'The chances of moving into a different class than the one you were born into are less than in Sweden, the U.S. and Australia, but better than in Germany, France or Italy.'

So do we actually need a quango called the Social Mobility Commission?

We can certainly do without another social mobility 'tsar'. 


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-5142221/Why-Milburn-wrong-Britains-haves-nots.html#ixzz50fTDt3Ba
Follow us:
@MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

 

 

 

H.F.1408

 

 

THEY'VE NO IDEA WHAT HARDSHIP REALLY MEANT

 

 

Since few subjects are more mythologised than poverty, inequality and social mobility, it was no surprise to see Alan Milburn flouncing out of his job as the Government's social mobility tsar with some overblown rhetoric about our supposedly divided country.

No fair-minded person would deny that Britain is not as equal as it should be. Too often the system seems rigged in favour of the powerful, and there often seems a glaring gulf between the very richest 1 per cent and the rest of us.

Yet listening to Mr Milburn's baleful words about 'social division', you could be forgiven for thinking Britain was one of the poorest and most bitterly divided nations on earth, instead of one of the richest, safest and most stable.

 

Slums: Children in the Gorbals area of Glasgow in 1956

Indeed, despite all the political bluster, most indices of national income inequality and relative poverty show that they are lower now than at any point since the mid-1980s. On top of that, Britain's major national institutions, such as the BBC and our great universities, are rightly keener to welcome outsiders – especially from racial and ethnic minorities – than at any time in history.

It is often said that Parliament, for example, is shamefully unrepresentative. But when you look at the figures, there have actually never been more female, black and Asian MPs, and there have never been more MPs from state schools.

What the arguments about social mobility and inequality really lack, in fact, is a sense of perspective. Listening to some strident Left-wing commentators, who talk as if Britain were some nightmarish Third World dystopia, I wonder if they have any sense of history at all.

Only a generation or two ago, millions of people in this country lived in conditions of appalling dirt, damp, disease and dereliction. As recently as 1950, almost half of all homes had no inside bathroom.

Many families had to share an outdoor toilet with their neighbours. The lucky ones had their own loo, hidden in a dingy little shed, yet at night they still had to dash across the yard carrying a lamp or candle.

What was more, millions of people would have marvelled at the kitchen appliances, high-definition televisions, mobile phones and central heating that almost all of us take for granted today.

 

Since few subjects are more mythologised than poverty, inequality and social mobility, it was no surprise to see Alan Milburn flouncing out of his job as the Government's social mobility tsar with overblown rhetoric about our supposedly divided country, says Dominic Sandbrook

In 2017, even most of our poorest families own televisions and mobile phones. Yet as late as 1956, some 14 per cent of British homes did not even have electricity. As one Cornishman later remembered, his family cooked on a range, warmed themselves by an open fire, went to bed early and read by candlelight.

'Of course, there was no light in the bathroom,' he recalled, 'so if you wanted a bath in the evening you had to take a candle up, and if there was too much steam the candle went out.'

Even if people did have electricity, central heating was virtually unknown for all but a tiny minority.

'We did everything in one room and that was the room with the fireplace in it,' remembered one woman. 'The fireplace not only heated you, it boiled your water, it cooked your food, it was where you had your bath, it was the main hub of the house.' Even in the supposedly swinging Sixties – which are often remembered as a high point of equality and social mobility – millions of people endured privations that seem almost unimaginable today.

In 1963, for example, an investigation by The Times newspaper found that many working-class families in London were living in Third World conditions.

One young couple, 'near to tears' with shame, showed the reporter around the tiny rented room in which they had to live.

'There was no water, except for a cold tap in the back yard down three flights of dark, rickety stairs,' the paper reported. 'The one lavatory for the 11 people in the building was too filthy to use. Cooking facilities had to be shared. The house was rat-infested and the walls so ridden with bugs and beetles that the girl was afraid to replace the ancient wall-paper which helped to some extent to keep them from crawling into the room.'

 

What the arguments about social mobility and inequality really lack, in fact, is a sense of perspective. Listening to some strident Left-wing commentators, who talk as if Britain were some nightmarish Third World dystopia, I wonder if they have any sense of history at all

Such stories were far from unusual. In 1964, the writer Geoffrey Moorhouse visited industrial Lancashire and was shocked to find another young family crammed into a tiny terraced house facing a gigantic factory wall, with no bath, toilet or even running hot water, in a street where the chimney smoke meant their laundry was dirty again even before it was dry, while their baby was 'covered in smuts after five minutes in his pram'.

Even at the end of the 1960s, researchers in Nottingham's poverty-stricken St Ann's neighbourhood found thousands of people living in houses 'in various stages of dilapidation and decay; houses that lack the basic amenities taken for granted by most people'.

That meant no central heating, no inside toilets, and sometimes no hot running water. 'You get dirty in St Ann's quite easily, but it is hard to get clean,' the investigators reported. 'It is often damp. It is often cold. It is never easy to make it dry and warm.' Of course Britain today is far from perfect, and life for those at the bottom can still be a struggle against hardship, anxiety and deprivation.

Yes, too many people rely on food banks. And yes, too many young people struggle to find rewarding jobs, get on to the property ladder or carve out a meaningful role in society.

Yet all too often, in our love for national self-flagellation, we forget the fundamental fact about modern Britain, which is that most of us lead warmer, healthier, richer and more comfortable lives than any generation before.

I realise, of course, that this is not what many people want to hear. Only three years ago, the BBC's Norman Smith – the Corporation's assistant political editor – claimed the Coalition government's spending cuts were taking Britain back to the 'land of The Road To Wigan Pier', a reference to George Orwell's searing book, published in 1937, which explored the lives of poor families in the depths of the Great Depression. At the time, plenty of commentators seized on Mr Smith's parallel as proof that Britain was sinking into some dark age of poverty, inequality and mass starvation. But of course this was nonsense.

For the vast majority, the world of the recent past, in which millions of people fought a daily battle against hunger, darkness, damp, disease and dirt, has mercifully disappeared.

So too has our automatic deference to a patrician class who believed themselves born to rule, and moved smoothly through Eton and Oxbridge to wield the levers of power in politics, the Civil Service and the military. Although it is true that social mobility for many people is painfully slow, it is too lazy to blame this on government policy. In fact, almost every government in living memory has tried to make social mobility a priority.

The truth, unpalatable as it may sound, is that massive economic and technological changes have destroyed the manufacturing jobs that once provided so many people with a leg up. Indeed, the pace of technological change may well mean things get worse before they get better, as we adjust to the new world of computers and robots.

No amount of top-down State initiatives, and no amount of fiddling with the tax and benefit systems, can change that.

Of course there is still a role for government. But it would be a terrible mistake to introduce the kind of quotas so beloved of the Left, with Oxbridge colleges forced to admit state-prescribed numbers of students from ethnic minorities, or British businesses compelled to favour job applicants from 'deserving' postcodes.

The most obvious priorities, to my mind, are to ensure that every child has the benefit of a rigorous education (which is, alas, still far from the case); to offer proper technical training instead of encouraging non-academic youngsters to waste their time at university; and to attract more overseas businesses in the wake of Brexit.

So yes, we need to think hard about the problem of social mobility in a society where manufacturing – the single greatest ladder in the post-war age – has largely disappeared. But cracking it will take hard, painstaking, unglamorous work – not public handwringing and political posturing.



Read more:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5142235/Arguments-inequality-lack-sense-perspective.html#ixzz50xQqVwd7
Follow us:
@MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

 

DECEMBER 4-2017

H.F.1412

BRASS-PLATED HYPOCRITS

 

 

They posture as DEFENDERS of our NATIONAL SOVEREIGNTY. But for years the BREXIT REBELS have let BRUSSELS

MAKE OUR LAWS 

Says a despairing QUENTIN LETTS

 

 

BRASS-PLATED HYPOCRITS

 

 

They posture as DEFENDERS of our NATIONAL SOVEREIGNTY. But for years the BREXIT REBELS have let BRUSSELS

MAKE OUR LAWS 

Says a despairing QUENTIN LETTS

 

 

ENGLAND' CIVIL WAR, which began in 1642,was a fractious time in our history when the ruling elite  was over thrown by Oliver Cromwell's parliamentarians.

Cromwell and his supporters were fed up with being lorded around by an arrogant Crown which for years had spent and taxed without giving the ruled as say in their affairs.

Some 374 years later- on June 23, 2O16 -  we saw a similar insurrection.  This time the part of the bloated status qua was played by Parliament. Like the corrupt regime  of Charles 1, the Houses of Parliament had come to think that they could behave as they wished. They regarded criticism as lese-majeste.

When the Press exposed various parliamentary expenses fiddles, the Commons and Lords responded by trying to put

NEWSPAPERS OUT OF BUSINESS

Parliament's adversary in today's civil war, however, is not the Press. It is a great deal mightier than that.

IT IS THE

BRITISH PEOPLE

who on that June day last year voted in record numbers

TO LEAVE THE RULING CLASS'S

beloved

EUROPEAN UNION

Since then, as in 1642, the elite has been pushing back. The princelings of Westminster have been scheming hard to overturn the oily serfs

WHO VOTED LEAVE

On Wednesday, we saw the latest skirmish in this neuralgic (but so far thankfully non-violent0 conflict, Eleven Conservative MPs led by Dominic Grieve QC, collaborated with Jeremy Corbyn's Labour and other opposition parties to demand that they, rather than Theresa May, should approve or block

OUR WITHDRAWAL FROM THE

[COLLECTIVIST- CORRUPT- UNDEMOCRATIC-COSTLY-INSANE-DEMENTED-EUROPEAN UNION]

 The rebel Tories claimed to be acting out of the highest motivation but 11 of them were long-standing

EUROPHILES

and seven of them were disappointed ex-ministers.

[releasing their spite and anger.]

Take Oliver Heald, a middle-rater who held various portfolios in Opposition and Government and was even made 'Sir Oliver' before No 10 said he should make way for younger blood. What a waste of of a knighthood.

Or take Nicky Morgan, a thoroughly unimpressive former Cabinet minister who seems to boil with frustrated ambition- she once fancied herself a future leader of the Tory Party!. Or how about

Jonathan Djanogly?

He is a third division sort of talent but from a rich family and inherited John Major's vast majority in Huntingdon.

Mr Djanogly served briefly as an unremarkable junior minister at the start of the Cameron Government before being returned to the backbenches. Who is to know what sort of desire for vengeance bubbles through his veins?

How odd to think that HUNTINGDON was once

OLIVER CROMWELL'S SEAT.

I don't suppose the meritocratic lord protector would have thought much of squire Djanogly

On Wednesday there was a strong whiff of regal self-entitlement from

Mr Grieve

a former attorney general who-it is said-nurses an unresolved sense of grievance that he ,too, is no longer in government.

I will not ask you to imagine this long-chinned, humourless scrivener Grieve, in the should-length, curly hairdo favoured by the 17th century Stuart royal family, for that matter, will I give you nightmares by picturing mars may as a warded Cromwell in high collar and leather jerkin; but there are parallels.

For it is Mrs May who (however ineptly at times) is representing the put upon

COMMONERS OF ENGLAND WHO HAVE HAD ENOUGH.

And it is Mr Grieve, who as he stamped his feet on Wednesday and said it was intolerable that he and his ilk should have their authority questioned, might so easily have been the

THE IMPERILLED ABSOLUTE MONARCH.

'The parliamentary process', he averred, 'is not just about the imposition of the will of the majority; it is the process by which we obtain consent for what the majority choose to do.'

 

I defy you to read that and not discern in it the lofty attitude of the over-intellectual lawyer saying

'we brainy few are the ones who run this country rather than you the lumpen majority'.

[WHAT GROSS ARROGANCE THE LAWYER HAS.]

For the record, let it be added that Mr Grieve is an ardent Francophile who is a member of France's Legion d'Honneur. Given the strength Brussel's Brexit negotiations Michel Barnier could gain from the trouble he has caused the May Government, Mr Grieve must surely be in line for an upgrade on his rank in the 'legion'.

[FOR SELLING OUT HIS OWN COUNTRY TO A FOREIGN POWER.

Not that there was anything particularly honourable about Wednesday's debate. It was an ill-tempered affair, pretty one-sided in that few Brexiteers bothered to take part.

You can hardly blame them, for those who did (such as North Essex's faultlessly polite Bernard Jenkin) were shouted down, hissed and sneered at by a baying gang that included

Chuka Umunna

Ben Bradshaw

Anna Soubry

and

Yvette Cooper

Mr Jenkin was even accused by Ms Cooper of

'Stalinism'

for suggesting that she was seeking to reverse Brexit'.

But is that not exactly what she and her little friends were up to? it is so obvious, I find it baffling the Remainers pretend otherwise.

One who has at least given up that pretence is New Labour's Lord Adonis.

who after Wednesday's vote tweeted the remark

'First step towards defeat of Brexit

Miss Soubry then took to Twitter to make plain that she agreed with Adonis.

The Blairites and Tory Europhiles who took part in Wednesday's debate did so with repeated, mocking claims that they were merely doing what the supporters of Brexit had allegedly wanted: they were letting Parliament

'take back control'

of

BRITISH SOVEREIGNTY.

The way they said this, with curling lips and sarcasm, betrayed the fact that they were mocking the

LEAVE CAMPAIGN'S CELEBRATED 2016 slogan.

To these Remainers, politics is like chess: a game with cunning gambits and ingenious feints, where the art is to be at least five intellectual moves ahead of your opponent.

Voters  do not have the time or patience for such ironic drollery.

THEY JUST WANT THEIR POLITICIANS TO GET ON WITH

BREXIT.

And yet we should admit there is a Catch-22 here, Yes, the LEAVE VOTE was about restoring SOVEREIGNTY to the Westminster Parliament.

'Take back control'

was a brilliant slogan because it so perfectly captured the argument for leaving the

UNDEMOCRATIC-FOREIGN RUN EU

But the next few months present a slender window of time in which-before our departure from the EU is agreed - that same Parliament could turn round and say

'WE CHOOSE TO STAY IN THE EU.'

That is the paralysis, the ingenious little conceit, that Mr Grieve and his Blairite confreres seem to be aiming for, and it is a great pity that Mrs May's ill-fated snap election has given them the parliamentary numbers to make her life so difficult. Yet their posturing as

DEFENDERS  OF DEMOCRACY

WILL NOT WASH.

For two reasons.

The first is that the EU referendum was

NOT

a parliamentary election. It went beyond Westminster. In fact, it was a vote above and against Parliament by the People

-and it had been set up as that by MPs themselves' as a result of the electoral promise in 2015 by David Cameron.

The may claim that Parliament trumps a referendum but the fact that this referendum was so firmly created by Parliament gives last year's

LEAVE VOTE

the senior rank.

The second reason  we should dismiss the Remainers new-found  claims to believe in parliamentary sovereignty is  that for years these

GRIEVES and COOPER

and

UMNNAS

and

SOUBRYS

KEN CLARKES

happily sold our democratic birth-rite as time and time again they allowed the EU and its

JUSTICE SYSTEM

to override

OUR

PARLIAMENTARY SOVEREIGNTY

and

BRITISH COURTS.

They may now be clasping parliamentary self-determination to their bosoms but where was that

NOBLE PRINCIPLE

when for decades, they let

BRUSSELS MAKE OUR LAWS?

I used to sit in the Press  gallery when those

EU EDICTS

were imposed.

Barely a a voice was raised against them.

Whoosh went billions of pounds in payments to the EU'

The money was signed off by

MINISTERIAL FIAT.

Yet now these same  frauds claim that  the Government can not use similar powers to get us out of of that

BRUSSELS QUICKSAND?

WHAT CANT.

These brass-plated hypocrites claim they that they are seeking to strengthen Parliament but all they do is to make plain Parliament's opposition to the

WILL OF THE PEOPLE

And by so doing they undermine dangerously

OUR TRUST

in the very HOUSE they occupy.

*  *  *

[Those Quislings named above should be shunned and shamed until they admit their grievous faults.

*

TREACHERY

 

'It is time to fear when tyrants seem to kiss.'-

Shakespeare.

'Of all the vices to which human nature is subject, treachery is the most infamous and detestable, being compounded of fraud, cowardice, and revenge. The greatest wrongs will not justify it, as it destroys those principles of mutual confidence and security by which society can subsist.'-

L.M Stretch.

 

TREASON

 

 'Fellowship in treason is a bad ground of confidence.'-

BURKE,  Edmund

 

'Where trust is greatest, there treason is in its most horrid shape.'-

DRYDEN

 

[TREASON

The Oath taken by the Her Majesty the  Queen and Her Ministers has been broken as its contents will show.

Unfortunately ,the death penalty for TREASON was changed by warmonger Tony Blair late one night in the House of Commons  to LIFE IMPRISONMENT some years ago. No doubt it was to protect all who could be indicted for TREASON

http://eutruth.uk

We have been unable to get a link to the Daily Mail for this article at the present time so we will return shortly to continue this excellent and timely expose! by QUENTIN LETTS.]

[   3.05pm -Friday, December 15, 2017]

 

[ COMMENTS IN BRACKETS ARE OURS!]

DECEMBER 16,2017

 

H.F.1338

 

*

 

COOKING UP A RUSE TO KEEP US MIRED IN THE EU GLUE PIT

QUENTIN LETTS sees remainers prolong the unease

Labour's Kate Hoey (Vauxhall) cut through the bluster to describe yesterday’s Commons debate as ‘lawyer versus lawyer’.

More accurately, however, it was ‘lawyer after lawyer’, for nearly all the MPs who spoke in the debate were Remainers.

Miss Hoey was using ‘lawyer’ in the disparaging sense. 

Here were puffed-up, prolix scriveners, fluffing out coat-tails as they sought to complicate, entangle, embugger and ensure that only they are the ones who run our country. 

 

Labour's Kate Hoey (Vauxhall) cut through the bluster to describe yesterday’s Commons debate as ‘lawyer versus lawyer’. The MP is pictured at the Brexit Conference in London last month 

 

More accurately, however, it was ‘lawyer after lawyer’, for nearly all the MPs who spoke in the debate were Remainers. Miss Hoey was using ‘lawyer’ in the disparaging sense. She is pictured showing her support for the Leave campaign ahead on the EU referendum, last year 

No others need apply. We’re the ruling class. We jurists are the ones who decide and you, the dirty-fingernailed electorate, can get stuffed.

Each time the Government seems to taken a substantial step towards getting us out of the Brussels gluepit, as happened with Mrs May’s December 8 agreement in Brussels, Remainers cook up another ruse to create a sense Brexit might yet be stopped. 

That was their purpose yesterday: To prolong the unease.

Some pretended to be consumed with anguish about ministers imposing laws without Parliament’s say.

They never protested much about that all those decades when we had our laws dictated by the EU.

 

Yvette Cooper, opening the hours of debate, wobbled her head and said the country ‘should trust Parliament to be mature and sensible’

Yvette Cooper (Lab, Normanton, Pontefract and Castleford), opening the hours of debate, wobbled her head and said the country ‘should trust Parliament to be mature and sensible’. 

Ha! She wanted the Commons given the power to delay Brexit, though only by ‘a couple of months’. 

The few Brexiteers in a sparsely attended Chamber did not believe her. Nigel Evans (Con, Ribble Valley) suggested she wanted Brexit stopped ‘for years’. Miss Cooper shook her head most forcefully and shot Mr Evans a warty stare.

Europhile lawyer Ken Clarke (Con, Rushcliffe) was at his most dismissive of the ‘scurrilous Right wing’.

He foghorned and reminisced, moving his forearm sideways like someone barging clutter off a table. He didn’t much like it when a Brexiteer, Yeovil’s Marcus Fysh, suggested Mr Clarke was misleading the House in some of his claims.

 

John Baron (on,Basildon 7 Billericay also told the old buffer ‘he does risk sounding very condescending’

By the time Mr Clarke sat down he was a touch magenta round the chops. Sir Oliver Letwin (Con, W Dorset), all conversational cornices and congenial gaseousness, said the ‘only logical possibility’ stemming from the Remainers’ manoeuvres was that they wanted to force Theresa May to ‘leave Brexit aside’.

Philip Davies (Con, Shipley) put it more bluntly. These Remoaners wanted ‘to overturn and frustrate’ last year’s EU referendum.

Mr Davies said it was a pity anti-Brexit egghead Dominic Grieve (Con, Beaconsfield) ‘hadn’t got the courage of his convictions to admit that’.

There would be a fearful backlash from the British public if the Grieves of this world had their way, predicted Mr Davies. 

Around Mr Grieve a doughnut of Europhile aesthetes had formed: Sarah Wollaston, veritably haloed by saintliness, Bob Neill, jumpy as a novice parachutist, serial rebel Heidi Allen, and lawyer Antoinette Sandbach, who would later wail to the Chair that some beastly person behind her was talking too loudly. 

Jacob Rees-Mogg (Con, NE Somerset) squinted at them from a safe distance. 

Ed Vaizey (Wantage and Didcot) was in orange socks and, like George Freeman (Mid Norfolk), wore the sort of horizontal-striped tie favoured by middle-aged groovers going through a crisis.

 

Mr Freeman nodded sagely as Mr Grieve said how horrible some Eurosceptics had been about him.

Mind you, Grieve himself took a pop at Iain Duncan Smith, who had apparently accused Mr Grieve of ‘grandstanding’. Ye gods. Cause for a duel on Hampstead Heath at the very least. Mr Grieve made plain he did not think IDS had been much cop when he was Tory Party leader.

On the Labour benches, Ben Bradshaw and Helen Goodman cackled as Mr Grieve worked himself into ever greater indignations. Anti-Brexit lawyer Anna Soubry (Con, pro-Brexit Broxtowe) made repeated interventions against the Government and each time ended by massaging her lips like a trumpeter. 

Mr Grieve, after accusing Eurosceptics of being ‘fixated on getting us out’, ended by comparing himself to Sir Winston Churchill.

 

 


Read more:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5177425/QUENTIN-LETTS-sees-remainers-prolong-unease.html#ixzz51W6Pgwav
Follow us:
@MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on FACEBOOK

[COMMENTS IN BRACKETS ETC.-ARE OURS.]

H.F.1417/1

Sunday, November 26, 2017

David Wilcock Explains The Rules Of The Illuminati & How They Operate


(Joe Martino) At times it’s laughed at, at times it’s taken very seriously and now, the term “Illuminati” has gained such a large amount of attention and popularity that it begs a deeper exploration by those not even in the ‘conspiracy realm’ but who are simply curious and seeking truth.
 


Related 
David Wilcock Update: Something Very Big, Part III: Saudi Mass Arrests Sign of Impending Cabal Defeat?

Source - Collective Evolution

by 
Joe Martino, November 25th, 2017

There is certainly a great deal of disinformation, propaganda and distraction when it comes to the Illuminati and other ‘conspiracy theories.’ With certain alternative news websites out there continuously publishing fake or misleading stories, it can sometimes take away from the truth other outlets are working to bring forth credibly. Thus, making sense of what’s actually going on can be difficult at times, especially when the mainstream tosses those who ask these questions in the category of “looney’s.”

In reality, fingers are often pointed towards Hollywood movie stars, music artists and entertainers who are seen throwing up specific hand signs or music videos constantly containing significant ancient art/symbolism. And although these stars are not the Illuminati themselves, they are tools for them, and their use of the cabals symbolism is to popularize or normalize the religion that this group follows.

 


And while some feel this is simply a joke being passed around to get people on the internet talking, others have explored, researched and heard directly from the horse’s mouth what the truth really is. I believe it’s time we pull our heads out of the sand and have the courage to truly look at this, what it means, how it impacts our lives and what we can do to move on from it, because it is very real. In today’s terms, it’s often referred to as the Deep State, Shadow Government or Elite.
 

If we want to know where we can go, we first have to identify the experience we are facing and how it functions. Sure, there is no denying the fact that corporations dictate major government policy,and that a handful of corporations and the people who run them seem to have control over major resources and industries that currently govern our world, but without us they are powerless.

This is no conspiracy. Within the past couple of years multiple studies have examined the allocation of global resources and wealth. They’ve found that the richest 1 percent on the planet own the majority of global wealth. On top of this, our health care industry, food industry, energy industry, entertainment industry, education and the world of finance are all owned and operated by a handful of corporations and the people that run them. (
source
) You might be saying “yeah, so what?” The point is, all of these industries continue to participate in activities that destroy the planet, our health and overall well-being. Meanwhile, we all go to school, work and live our lives while continuing to remain blind to what is happening in the world.

 

“I want a nation of workers, not thinkers.” – John

D. Rockefeller

Separating Fact From Fiction

People have sometimes asked me, why talk about such negative things? If we talk about the Illuminati we’re giving power to them and focusing our attention on them. This is an understandable first reaction when you consider what has happened in the New Age movement with disinformation about how our reality is formed. Although our thoughts and beliefs do help co-create our reality, our purpose is not to avoid the truth. We must awaken to what’s going on, snap out of our global sleep and begin to create real change. Putting a ‘negative’ or ‘positive’ connotation on talking about the Illuminati comes down to how much power you choose to give that yourself.

If we want to know where we can go, we first have to identify the experience we are facing and how it functions. Sure, there is no denying the fact that
corporations dictate major government policy, and that a handful of corporations and the people who run them seem to have control over major resources and industries that currently govern our world, but without us they are powerless.

 

Find Out More >

94,400

 

Why This Symbolism Is Used
 


While at an event in California called Contact In The Desert, we interviewed David Wilcock, a longtime occult researcher. During the interview, he mentioned that the Elite/Illuminati believe they must convey their intentions to humanity in order to, in essence, get permission from us to have them enslave us. This manifests as rituals during mass sports events, symbolism found around society and in various popular industries like film and music.

The rules and symbols this group follows is very similar to that of many religions we know of today like Christianity, Judaism, Islam etc. To them, it’s their strong belief, and their goal is to popularize their religion and symbolism so they can gain as much power from it as possible.

Check out the clip below to hear what this symbolism is about. You can watch the full interview with
David Wilcock here.

 

________________________________________________________________
Question -- What is the goal of this website? Why do we share different sources of information that...

 

November 25th, 2017
 

 

H.F.1396

Sunday, November 26, 2017

David Wilcock Explains The Rules Of The Illuminati & How They Operate


(Joe Martino) At times it’s laughed at, at times it’s taken very seriously and now, the term “Illuminati” has gained such a large amount of attention and popularity that it begs a deeper exploration by those not even in the ‘conspiracy realm’ but who are simply curious and seeking truth.
 


Related 
David Wilcock Update: Something Very Big, Part III: Saudi Mass Arrests Sign of Impending Cabal Defeat?

Source - Collective Evolution

by 
Joe Martino, November 25th, 2017

There is certainly a great deal of disinformation, propaganda and distraction when it comes to the Illuminati and other ‘conspiracy theories.’ With certain alternative news websites out there continuously publishing fake or misleading stories, it can sometimes take away from the truth other outlets are working to bring forth credibly. Thus, making sense of what’s actually going on can be difficult at times, especially when the mainstream tosses those who ask these questions in the category of “looney’s.”

In reality, fingers are often pointed towards Hollywood movie stars, music artists and entertainers who are seen throwing up specific hand signs or music videos constantly containing significant ancient art/symbolism. And although these stars are not the Illuminati themselves, they are tools for them, and their use of the cabals symbolism is to popularize or normalize the religion that this group follows.

 


And while some feel this is simply a joke being passed around to get people on the internet talking, others have explored, researched and heard directly from the horse’s mouth what the truth really is. I believe it’s time we pull our heads out of the sand and have the courage to truly look at this, what it means, how it impacts our lives and what we can do to move on from it, because it is very real. In today’s terms, it’s often referred to as the Deep State, Shadow Government or Elite.
 

If we want to know where we can go, we first have to identify the experience we are facing and how it functions. Sure, there is no denying the fact that corporations dictate major government policy,and that a handful of corporations and the people who run them seem to have control over major resources and industries that currently govern our world, but without us they are powerless.

This is no conspiracy. Within the past couple of years multiple studies have examined the allocation of global resources and wealth. They’ve found that the richest 1 percent on the planet own the majority of global wealth. On top of this, our health care industry, food industry, energy industry, entertainment industry, education and the world of finance are all owned and operated by a handful of corporations and the people that run them. (
source
) You might be saying “yeah, so what?” The point is, all of these industries continue to participate in activities that destroy the planet, our health and overall well-being. Meanwhile, we all go to school, work and live our lives while continuing to remain blind to what is happening in the world.

 

“I want a nation of workers, not thinkers.” – John

D. Rockefeller

Separating Fact From Fiction

People have sometimes asked me, why talk about such negative things? If we talk about the Illuminati we’re giving power to them and focusing our attention on them. This is an understandable first reaction when you consider what has happened in the New Age movement with disinformation about how our reality is formed. Although our thoughts and beliefs do help co-create our reality, our purpose is not to avoid the truth. We must awaken to what’s going on, snap out of our global sleep and begin to create real change. Putting a ‘negative’ or ‘positive’ connotation on talking about the Illuminati comes down to how much power you choose to give that yourself.

If we want to know where we can go, we first have to identify the experience we are facing and how it functions. Sure, there is no denying the fact that
corporations dictate major government policy, and that a handful of corporations and the people who run them seem to have control over major resources and industries that currently govern our world, but without us they are powerless.

 

Find Out More >

94,400

 

Why This Symbolism Is Used
 


While at an event in California called Contact In The Desert, we interviewed David Wilcock, a longtime occult researcher. During the interview, he mentioned that the Elite/Illuminati believe they must convey their intentions to humanity in order to, in essence, get permission from us to have them enslave us. This manifests as rituals during mass sports events, symbolism found around society and in various popular industries like film and music.

The rules and symbols this group follows is very similar to that of many religions we know of today like Christianity, Judaism, Islam etc. To them, it’s their strong belief, and their goal is to popularize their religion and symbolism so they can gain as much power from it as possible.

Check out the clip below to hear what this symbolism is about. You can watch the full interview with
David Wilcock here.

 

________________________________________________________________
Question -- What is the goal of this website? Why do we share different sources of information that...

 

November 25th, 2017
 

 

H.F.1396

Remainers who mock the return of the blue British passport are showing their true colours, writes PETER OBORNE

 

How sad — and utterly predictable. News that the traditional blue UK passports will be revived after Brexit has left many Remainers fulminating with rage and rancour.

Labour MPs have been queuing to voice their displeasure at this inspired and patriotic move.

For example, Tottenham MP David Lammy says the return of the blue passport means that ‘Brexit is beginning to feel like a huge effort to turn the clock back with some misguided imperial overtones’.

And from across the political divide, Lord (Charles) Powell, who was Mrs Thatcher’s most respected private secretary when she was in Downing Street, was even more scornful.

 

The new blue passports will be phased in from October 2019, when the current supplier's contract expires and soon after the UK leaves the European Union

He sneered that the new passport was ‘part of the nostalgia on which the predominantly elderly Brexit constituency thrives’.

How typical of such people to deride something that will be a potent, everyday symbol of Britain’s independence from the EU come 2019.

Disingenuously, during the referendum campaign, Powell claimed that if she had still been alive, Mrs Thatcher would have considered the vote to be ‘anti-democratic’ and she would have campaigned to Remain.

I disagree. And I believe that no one would have been more delighted by the move back to blue passports than Mrs T.

Not because Margaret Thatcher was a hard-line anti-European or an imperialist determined to turn the clock back to the 19th century when Britain ruled the world.

No, she was always a pragmatic and sensible politician and never let such emotional factors dictate what she thought best for Britain.

Above all, she was a Conservative. And as such, she always understood the value of national symbols — be it our flag, our currency, the monarch — or the British passport. (Remember, too, how she shamed British Airways into reverting to Union flag tailfins after it experimented with ethnic ‘world art’ designs?)

The fact is that Conservatives have long realised that such symbols represent political authority and the traditions of society accumulated over centuries. They understand such traditions help to bind people and communities, providing a national rallying point and sense of identity.

The current European Union-approved burgundy document (pictured) was controversially introduced in 1988

By contrast, too many on the Left have held that national symbols are irrational, misguided and wrong. Indeed, they have been contemptuous of the nation state itself, seeing it as the source of wars and exploitation.

Karl Marx viewed belief in the nation state as a form of ‘false consciousness’ which distracted workers from pursuing their real interests, and fighting the class enemy.

So it is no surprise that Jeremy Corbyn’s neo-Marxist Labour Party should disdain the new blue passports.

For its part, it makes perfect sense that Theresa May’s government should reintroduce something that was such an important symbol of British national identity. And, indeed, from 2019, will be so again.

The burgundy EU passports — forced on us in 1988 — were a striking example of what made so many Britons dissatisfied with EU membership and how our sense of nationhood was being subsumed into a Brussels-run superstate. And thus 17 million of them voted to quit the EU.

When this country joined what was then the Common Market more than 40 years ago, Britons were told by prime minister Edward Heath that they were joining a free trade area and Britain was not giving up its ability to govern itself.

The appearance of a joint EU passport was just one of many things that showed this was a blatant lie. It came unannounced. Nobody voted for it. Nobody wanted it.

Above all, it was typical of the EU: completely undemocratic, imposed from above by a pan-national elite contemptuous of nation states.

Most shamefully, it showed that national borders were of little consequence. Whereas the old version merely entitled a citizen of another nation to cross national borders, anyone with a European passport would be instantly recognised at frontiers and receive equal treatment from the authorities.

But, of course, it offered much more than that.

EU nationals could come to Britain and stay as long as they liked. They could look for work and claim British benefits while they did so. They could, and often did, undercut British workers.

Crucially, a European passport meant they could make full use of the British welfare state — an entitlement which has been widely exploited.

In truth, many foreigners have seen that our welfare state is more generous than anything similar offered in their own countries and have come here to take advantage.

The British are a deeply tolerant and generous people, and we will remain so after Brexit. But there are limits to such generosity.

And this is why the European passport has, like the unelected, unaccountable Brussels machine, become a symbol for so much that people don’t like about the EU.

To say a return to the blue passport is ‘part of the nostalgia on which the predominantly elderly Brexit constituency thrives’, as Lord Powell does, is, frankly, an insult.

I should point out that Powell, who has sat on the board of many large international companies, will have seen those firms thrive by using cheap labour from other EU countries.

His affluent ilk, too, will have benefited from such cheap foreign labour in other ways — from domestic helpers, to builders and plumbers.

However, the experience has been very different for millions of hard-pressed British workers.

The period when the burgundy European passport has been in use has seen their pay often cut, their jobs threatened, and the public services — such as the NHS, education, housing and transport — on which they depend come under huge extra pressure from people born abroad.

And for Labour MPs to champion the European passport is to sneer at their own heartlands who have struggled to cope with the economic conditions it has helped to create.

Many of these MPs despise the concept of national citizenship and Britishness — and yearn to be

‘citizens of the world’ instead.

Could EU laws mean new British passports are made in Europe? 

The company which produces passports for British citizens is UK money and security printing firm De Le Rue in Gateshead.

But the contract for who produces them is due to expire soon and, due to EU rules, a French and a German firm have also entered tenders.

Martin Sutherland, De Le Rue's chief executive, has spoken of his hopes the documents

will be made in Britain.

He told the Telegraph: 'We have submitted our bid for the renewal, which is in 2019 and will last for 10 years.

'It would be a shame if in the year of Brexit the contract was lost and the British passport was not printed by a British company.'

To them, any passport is anachronistic. Certainly, this is the philosophy of the bureaucrats in Brussels. They seem intent on obliterating any signs of nationhood — having got a common European currency, an EU foreign policy and their ultimate goal: a United States of Europe.

While the EU referendum campaign was tainted by the lies of Remainers with Project Fear, we are now hearing similar lies about the decision to reintroduce an old-style blue British passport.

James Caan, multi-millionaire and TV personality from Dragons’ Den, said it will cost £500 million to change the colour of the passport. This was completely untrue and he was forced to retract his claim.

But the attitude of Caan — part of the country’s smug rich — demonstrates that many Remainers still don’t understand the deep-seated reasons why the majority rejected Brussels rule.

A passport is a symbol of nationhood. And the British passport is no exception — famously stating: ‘Her Britannic Majesty’s Secretary of State requests and requires in the name of Her Majesty all those whom it may concern to allow the bearer to pass freely without let or hindrance, and to afford the bearer such assistance and protection as may be necessary.’

Above all, it symbolises British common values and the way we stand together. While reminding us of our magnificent past, it is also confirmation of an independent future.

Those who sneer at the return of our blue British passport are guilty of sneering at people who want this country to take the opportunity of having a much better future outside the EU.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-5212081/Remainers-mock-blue-passport-showing-true-colours.html#ixzz52PblrJWa
Follow us:
@MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

 

'Of the whole sum of human life no small part is that which consists of a man's relations to his country, and his feelings concerning it.'-

GLADSTONE

'The  love of country produces good manners; and good manners, love of country.- The less we satisfy our individual passions, the more we leave to our general.-

Montesquieu.

'The patriot's boast. where'er we roam. his first country ever is at home.'-

Goldsmith

'Love of country is one of the loftiest virtues; and so treason against it has been considered the most damning sins.-

E.A.Storrs

'There  can be no affinity nearer than our country.'

Plato

*

TREASON

 'The man was noble; but with his last attempt he wiped it out; betrayed his country; and his name remains to the ensuing age abhorred.'

Shakespeare

'Where trust is greatest, there treason is in its most horrid shape.'

Dryden

 

*

 

H.F.1426

 

 

A FREE PRESS!

It's finest expression had already been given in

MILTON'S

AREOPAGITICA.

Milton boldly proclaimed two principles of profound importance.

One was the immunity of the religious life from political regulation. The other was that doctrine which has been the strength of the best thought of individualism from his day to the present, to wit that the well-being of society requires the natural diversity of its members, and that coercive uniformity of morals and manners would spell the ruin and degradation of any people.

*

THE MODERN STATE by R. M MacIVER-1950

More!

 

 

 

 

 
THOUGHT OF THE DAY!

WE DO NOT KNOW WHY EMPIRES FALL AND STATES DECAY;  BUT WE CAN AT ANY RATE CONJECTURE, WITH NO LITTLE JUSTICE,   THAT A DISTURBANCE OF THE RACIAL COMPOSITION OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE WAS ONE GREAT CAUSE OF ITS FALL.  RIGHT LAWS AND SOUND MORALS FORM THE STRONGEST SAFEGUARD OF EVERY NATIONAL STATE; BUT A SOUND RACIAL BASIS IS ALSO NECESSARY.   A NATION MAY BE ENRICHED BY THE  VARIED CONTRIBUTIONS OF FOREIGN  IMMIGRATION; BUT IF THE STREAM OF IMMIGRATION GROWS UNCHECKED INTO THE VOLUME OF A GREAT RIVER,  A NATION MAY LOSE THE INTEGRITY OF THE SOLID CORE WHICH IS THE BASIS OF ITS TRADITION  AND THE NATION WHICH LOSES ITS TRADITIONS HAS LOST ITS VERY SELF.

[Earnest Barker-NATIONAL CHARACTER-1927]

*

A BETRAYAL OF OUR PAST OVER 50 YEARS

 (1959-2016)

 

 

 

THE SPIRIT OF A PEOPLE

THE FIRST TASK of any politics that could be really scientific was to relate authority to its principle source, to show its dependence on the whole social fabric, the customs and traditions, the modes of thought and the standards of life that prevail among a people.  ...the work of Montesquieu.   He really sought to understand society, to show the influence of underlying  conditions ,climatic, geographical, economic, to show that custom and institutions neither are made nor can be changed by fiat, to show that there is in every people a spirit of character which their law must reveal

THE MODERN STATE by R. M MacIVER-1950

THE SPIRIT OF ENGLAND BY WINSTON CHURCHILL.

 

 

 

 

Weekly Geo-Political News and Analysis

by Benjamin Fulford

 

Happy New Year: Hundreds of top Khazarian mobsters, including the Bush family, renditioned to Gitmo

 

In a historic moment of poetic justice, most of the U.S.-based top perpetrators of the fake “war on terror” have now themselves been renditioned to the U.S. Navy camp in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, Pentagon sources say.  “The Rothschild assets George Soros, Peter Munk, Peter Sutherland, the Bushes, the Podestas, and many others may have been airlifted to Gitmo for military tribunals, as the Department of Defense spends $500M to upgrade the prison and send more military police and Marines,” the sources say.

In one of many signs of just how historic the new American revolution is, “30 congressmen will not be returning in the new year,” the Pentagon sources say.  CIA sources also confirm that former U.S. President Bill Clinton, hoping for a plea bargain, is spilling the beans on people like former CIA head John Brennan, top U.S. Mossad agent Rahm Emmanuel, former Vice President Dick Cheney, and many others.

Furthemore, as U.S. President Donald Trump proclaims Janaury 2018 to be “Anti-Slavery Month,”
 

https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/president-donald-j-trump-proclaims-january-2018-national-slavery-human-trafficking-prevention-month/

… human trafficking centers around the world are being raided and shut down.  In Saudi Arabia, 3,000 child sex slaves have been freed, according to Russian FSB sources.  In the U.S., “there was a power outage on December 27th at the “pedo heaven Disneyland,” as the place was raided by special forces fighting human slavers, the Pentagon sources say.  In apparently connected events, Washington Post heir Bill Graham and Jordan Feldstein, the brother of the actor Jonah Hill, died last week, the sources point out.

Another move was that Julian Assange “was extracted from the Ecuadorian Embassy to take down the cabal, and he may be pardoned along with Mike Flynn,” the sources add.

Also, “On Christmas day, Delta Force raided a mansion owned by former President Barack Obama in …
 

The remainder of this article is only available to members of BenjaminFulford.net
Please Log In or Register to create an account.

 

Merry Christmas:  The 13 “Illuminati” bloodline families sue for peace

Peace on earth and goodwill to all (and not just men, but all life forms) is looking like a realistic goal for 2018 now that the 13 “Illuminati” * bloodline families, seeing their ancient rule of planet Earth collapsing, are suing for peace.  Last week a representative of the G7 (Germany, the U.K., the corporate U.S., Japan, Italy, France, and Canada) met with a representative of the White Dragon Society (WDS) to discuss peace terms, according to a WDS member who was present at the meeting.  The G7, of course, is the political front for the 13 bloodline families.  There can be no doubt that this meeting was made possible by people inside the military-industrial complex acting in the spirit of Jesus Christ, and for this we wish them all “a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year.”

The bloodline offer to negotiate peace is directly connected to the state of emergency that was declared last week by USA President Donald Trump.  If you have not seen it yet, please read the historic document in the link below.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/text-letter-president-congress-united-states-6/

“After Hanukkah, Trump declared a state of emergency and signed an executive order on December 20th freezing the assets of those accused of human rights abuses and corruption, a catch-all to bankrupt the Bushes, Clintons, Soros, Obama, the Cabal, and the global Jewish mafia,” was how a Pentagon source summed up the situation.

“The national emergency allows Trump to seize assets and unleash the military to carry out mass arrests and adjudicate via military tribunals, effectively imposing martial law,” the source continues.

The Pentagon source also sent a copy of this photograph with the explanation, “Trump wears purple when unveiling his national security strategy on December 18th in a victory lap over the Soros/Hillary purple revolution, and drinks water with both hands to simulate handcuffs.”

Clearly reacting to this situation, the representative of the bloodlines set the meeting for December 23rd, the birthday of the Japanese Emperor, and claimed to be a representative of the Imperial family as well as the G7.  The representative, who acted as if he was negotiating a surrender, said the bloodlines want to keep existing nation-states and institutions as they are, but…
 

The remainder of this article is only available to members of BenjaminFulford.net
Please Log In or Register to create an account.

 

Letter to the Editor – Experimental Quantum Anti-Gravity Successfully Replicated

 

I would like to let you know that my anti-gravity experiments have been successfully replicated by the Aerospace Engineering Department at the New Sciences & Technologies Faculty of the University of Tehran in the Islamic Republic of Iran. I have developed complete quantum anti-gravity hypothesis with direct testable predictions that are simple, clear, easy, and inexpensive.

As you know, present-day quantum gravity theories suffer from too many mathematical space dimensions, and from too few conclusive experimental results.

My hypothesis is simple, clear, and subject to easy empirical verification.  I offer clear explanation of the principles of quantum gravity, and also precisely describe how to perform simple and inexpensive experiments to verify it.

In order to clearly understand quantum anti-gravity, please follow these 8 steps:

  1. Start from this brief overview — Quantum Gravity in a Nutshell
  2. The theoretical basis for quantum gravity are the Abraham’s equations of the Abraham-Minkowski controversy, and their empirical counterpart — the Abraham force
  3. To understand how the Biefeld-Brown effect works, you need to be clear where B-B vectors point — “up” or “down”
  4. The Biefeld-Brown effect is an instance of the Abraham force.
  5. Study the section about gyroscope’s anomalous effect.
  6. Please, study all the material on THE BOYD BUSHMAN EFFECT page in order to appreciate the potential complex magnetic fields have for shaping quantum gravity interactions.
  7. Now, you are ready to read the short introduction to quantum gravity.
  8. Perform two simple experiments for empirical verification.

The following are the 10 “mysteries” that my hypothesis sheds new light upon:

  1. The main prediction of my hypothesis (2016) is that anti-hydrogen will anti-gravitate.
  2. Gravitational waves mystery.
  3. EmDrive mystery.
  4. Solar mystery.
  5. Mass mystery.
  6. Bicycle mystery.
  7. Propeller  mystery.
  8. Cloud mystery.
  9. Pioneer mystery.
  10. Missing mystery.

I have designed 4 progressively more complex experiments, and we have successfully performed one of them, the one of medium difficulty, which constitutes:

The empirical discovery of hitherto unknown physical interaction between angular momentum of a spinning gyroscope and Earth’s magnetic and electric fields.

To perform this experiment, we need a gyroscope with a vertical support, and magnetic and electric shielding cages.

According to my hypothesis, there will be a measurable time difference between a freely spinning gyroscope inside, and outside the cages.  A gyroscope freely spinning inside both cages will come to rest in less time than when spinning outside them.

The experiment was performed successfully and was recorded in the following two videos:

To have a clear idea what is involved in the experiment, please take a closer look at the above two videos first.

For the experiment, we used the following small and light gyroscope at 10,000 rpm:

It would be much better to use a heavier gyro, because the heavier the gyro, the stronger the effect, at the same rate of rpm.

The value of angular velocity (rpm) is important only insofar as to generate sufficient angular momentum to allow the gyro to spin freely for a longer time before it comes to rest.

The objective of the experiment was to obtain two values of the gyro’s run time:

  • Outside the shielding;
  • Inside the shielding.

In my experiment, the two sample values are, respectively:

  • 55.54 seconds
  • 51.87 seconds

There was a 3.67 second difference, which amounts to 6.6%.  The time difference is directly proportional to the quality and quantity of electrostatic shielding of the Faraday cage. Applying the magnetic shielding in addition to the electric one would further increase the time difference.

As you can see in the video, it is important that the gyro is elevated by means of a vertical support.  Ideally, gyro should start spinning as close to a vertical position as possible, and also be able to pass lower, while still spinning, than its horizontal position.

The reason for this effect is that the gyroscope inside the cages will be spinning in reduced strength of Earth’s magnetic and electric fields, which in turn reduces the strength of the Biefeld-Brown effect acting upon it.

The gyroscope outside the cages, spinning in the undiminished strength of Earth’s magnetic and electric fields, is subject to the full influence of the Biefeld-Brown effect that causes the gyroscope to resist Earth’s gravity pull, which happens to be none other than pure natural antigravity effect.

OBJECTIONS

  • All conductors, like the brass gyro, exhibit an effective diamagnetism when they experience a changing magnetic field.  The Lorentz force on electrons causes them to circulate around forming eddy currents.  The eddy currents then produce an induced magnetic field that opposes the applied field and resist the conductor’s motion.

—  That is true for both, the gyro spinning inside and outside the Faraday cage in Earth’s magnetic field.  It does not make any difference.

  • But the gyro’s induced magnetic field will generate eddy currents in the Faraday cage and the resultant magnetic field will slow down gyro’s spin (magnetic breaking), and hence the whole effect.  It is like dropping a magnet down a copper pipe: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8dFFL8TDt2Q

—   The analogy in the video applies, but only in principle.  Spinning brass gyro is not a strong neodymium magnet, and if, in principle, it generates any magnetic field, it is so weak that it will not even affect a needle of a compass.  As opposed to the copper pipe in the video, the enamel-coated copper mesh Faraday cage has much larger diameter (the inverse-square law), so it is enough to drop a strong neodymium magnet down the Faraday cage to see how much it would slow down, if at all.  As you can see in the above video, even few empty slits in the copper pipe greatly weaken the eddy currents, this being the reason for using enamel-coated copper mesh.  Diamagnetic materials, like brass, or copper, have a relative magnetic permeability that is less than or equal to 1, and therefore a magnetic susceptibility less than or equal to 0, since susceptibility is defined as χv=μv−1.  This means that diamagnetic materials, in principle, are repelled by magnetic fields.  However, since diamagnetism is such a weak property, its effects are not observable in everyday life.  Moreover, there is a big difference between Faraday cage made of solid copper, and one made of enamel-coated copper mesh.  The magnetic field induced in the gyro is weak, because Earth’s magnetic field is weak, so whatever little eddy currents could be induced by the gyro in solid copper Faraday cage will become irrelevant in the enamel-coated copper mesh Faraday cage, as you can see in the following two videos:

Even though it is true that the experiment, in principle, is open to influences from various phenomena, including the Carnegie curve, the overall result is clearly well beyond being attributed exclusively to these other phenomena.

To completely eliminate above objections, magnetic shielding needs to be applied in addition to the Faraday cage, and the gyro should be custom-made from a material which does not allow for eddy currents to flow in it.

Naturally,  I will be happy to answer any questions that you may have for me regarding the theoretical foundations as well as replication of the experiment.

With respect and much gratitude,  I am
Sincerely yours,

U.S. troops deploy worldwide with 10,000 sealed indictments to take down Khazarian mob

U.S. President Donald Trump spent the weekend at Camp David with his top generals to map out the exact strategy for decapitating the Khazarian mafia worldwide, say Pentagon sources.  “The Atlanta airport was shut down, while the Department of Defense refused to disclose the locations of 44,000 U.S. troops who may be involved in terminating the cabal worldwide,” a senior Pentagon source said.  There are now close to 10,000 sealed indictments as more and more of the Khazarian criminals give up evidence on their colleagues, the sources say.

There are also many extra-judicial killings going on.  “The liberal sanctuary city mayor of San Francisco, Edwin Lee, dropped dead after an illegal alien was found not guilty in the murder of Kate Steinle even after his confession,” one source notes.  “Lee’s death is a message to the Democrats and sanctuary city mayors like Rahm Emmanuel of Chicago and Bill De Blasio of New York City,” the source warns.

The Khazarian mob is also killing off lots of people.  In Japan, two former executives of Toshiba, Atsutoshi Nishida and Taizo Nishimura, suddenly died in the past two months because they were about to provide evidence about the March 11, 2011 Fukushima tsunami and nuclear terror attack against Japan, according to sources close to the royal family.

This attack was carried out by henchmen of the Rockefeller family, whose members include Hillary and Bill Clinton, the sources say.  The Rockellers, in turn, were taking orders from the fascist P2 Freemason lodge, they say.  The Rockefeller family, by the way, has elected Mel Rockefeller, the son of Nelson Rockefeller, as the new family head, these sources added.

In Canada, Barry Sherman, owner of the Canadian pharmaceutical giant Apotex, was found hanging dead alongside his wife Honey by the family’s indoor pool.  According to CIA sources, Sherman was …
 

The remainder of this article is only available to members of BenjaminFulford.net
Please Log In or Register to create an account.

 

 

H.F.1430

 
 
 
 
 

 

 
MAR-17 APR-17 MAY-17 JUN-17 JUL-17 AUG-17 SEP-17 OCT-17 NOV-17 DEC-17
JAN-18 FEB-18 MAR-18

APL-18

MAY-18

JUN-18

JUL-18

AUG-18

SEP-18

OCT-18

NOV-18

DEC-18

JAN-19

FEB-19

MAR-19

APR-19

MAY-19

JUN-19

JUL-19

AUG-19

 

 

 

 

THANK YOU FOR CALLING!

 

TOP OF PAGE

 

CLICK HERE FOR PREVIOUS FRONT PAGE-2012

FEBRUARY-FREEDOM NOW-PART 1-2018

FEBRUARY-FREEDOM NOW-PART 2-2018

FEBRUARY-FREEDOM NOW-PART 3-2018

FEBRUARY-FREEDOM NOW-PART 4-2018

FEBRUARY-FREEDOM NOW-NEW-PART 5-2018

FEBRUARY-FREEDOM NOW-NEW-PART 6-2018

  FEBRUARY-FREEDOM NOW-NEW- HOME PAGE-2018

 

THIS IS:

FEBRUARY-FREEDOM NOW-PART 2-2018