Please do your own research. The information I share is only a catalyst to expanding ones confined consciousness. I have NO desire for anyone to blindly believe or agree with what I share. Seek the truth for yourself and put your own puzzle together that has been presented to you. I'm not here to teach, preach or lead, but rather assist in awakening the consciousness of the collective from its temporary dormancy.
On the coronation of my liege, I thought it only fitting to extend a heartfelt invitation to you to commemorate this momentous occasion by visiting your very own kingdom within a kingdom: His Majesty’s Prison Belmarsh.
You will no doubt recall the wise words of a renowned playwright: “The quality of mercy is not strained. It droppeth as the gentle rain from heaven upon the place beneath.”
Ah, but what would that bard know of mercy faced with the reckoning at the dawn of your historic reign? After all, one can truly know the measure of a society by how it treats its prisoners, and your kingdom has surely excelled in that regard.
Your Majesty’s Prison Belmarsh is located at the prestigious address of One Western Way, London, just a short foxhunt from the Old Royal Naval College in Greenwich. How delightful it must be to have such an esteemed establishment bear your name.
It is here that 687 of your loyal subjects are held, supporting the United Kingdom’s record as the nation with the largest prison population in Western Europe. As your noble government has recently declared, your kingdom is currently undergoing “the biggest expansion of prison places in over a century”, with its ambitious projections showing an increase of the prison population from 82,000 to 106,000 within the next four years. Quite the legacy, indeed.
As a political prisoner, held at Your Majesty’s pleasure on behalf of an embarrassed foreign sovereign, I am honoured to reside within the walls of this world class institution. Truly, your kingdom knows no bounds.
During your visit, you will have the opportunity to feast upon the culinary delights prepared for your loyal subjects on a generous budget of two pounds per day. Savour the blended tuna heads and the ubiquitous reconstituted forms that are purportedly made from chicken. And worry not, for unlike lesser institutions such as Alcatraz or San Quentin, there is no communal dining in a mess hall. At Belmarsh, prisoners dine alone in their cells, ensuring the utmost intimacy with their meal.
Beyond the gustatory pleasures, I can assure you that Belmarsh provides ample educational opportunities for your subjects. As Proverbs 22:6 has it: “Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it.” Observe the shuffling queues at the medicine hatch, where inmates gather their prescriptions, not for daily use, but for the horizon-expanding experience of a “big day out”—all at once.
You will also have the opportunity to pay your respects to my late friend Manoel Santos, a gay man facing deportation to Bolsonaro’s Brazil, who took his own life just eight yards from my cell using a crude rope fashioned from his bedsheets. His exquisite tenor voice now silenced forever.
Venture further into the depths of Belmarsh and you will find the most isolated place within its walls: Healthcare, or “Hellcare” as its inhabitants lovingly call it. Here, you will marvel at sensible rules designed for everyone’s safety, such as the prohibition of chess, whilst permitting the far less dangerous game of checkers.
Deep within Hellcare lies the most gloriously uplifting place in all of Belmarsh, nay, the whole of the United Kingdom: the sublimely named Belmarsh End of Life Suite. Listen closely, and you may hear the prisoners’ cries of “Brother, I’m going to die in here”, a testament to the quality of both life and death within your prison.
But fear not, for there is beauty to be found within these walls. Feast your eyes upon the picturesque crows nesting in the razor wire and the hundreds of hungry rats that call Belmarsh home. And if you come in the spring, you may even catch a glimpse of the ducklings laid by wayward mallards within the prison grounds. But don’t delay, for the ravenous rats ensure their lives are fleeting.
I implore you, King Charles, to visit His Majesty’s Prison Belmarsh, for it is an honour befitting a king. As you embark upon your reign, may you always remember the words of the King James Bible: “Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy” (Matthew 5:7). And may mercy be the guiding light of your kingdom, both within and without the walls of Belmarsh.
NY Times: King Charles Arrives in Berlin for First State Visit as Monarch
Charles and Camilla, the queen consort, visited the Brandenburg Gate in Berlin to start their three-day trip to Germany.
These are not the best of times for the fake reality show called “The British Monarchy.” After the death of the grand old lady Queen Elizabeth last year, the doofus King Charles ushered in the end of the outdated veneration of this useless bunch of Jewified traitors to their subjects. Today’s featured Times article reveals — albeit inadvertently — just how far the monarchy has fallen.
“Making his first official overseas trip as Britain’s new monarch, King Charles III began a three-day state visit to Germany on Wednesday, with Camilla, the queen consort, greeting a crowd of hundreds of spectators at the landmark Brandenburg Gate in Berlin.”
“Hundreds of people lined up with the famous Unter den Linden, a boulevard in central Berlin (emphasis added)“
Only “hundreds” — in the heart of a city of 3.5 million population with a metro area of 6.1 million — turned out to greet the new King and Queen Consort of Great Britain for the first stop in Charlie’s pre-announced “world debut” tour??? — Or might that be “King” and “Queen Consort” — hmmm? Heck, on any given afternoon, one would expect “hundreds” of locals and tourists to be strolling about the Brandenburg Gate anyway! Couldn’t the Germans have at least conjured-up a rent-a-mob of several thousand for the meet and greet? Not even a few High School field trips to come out and say “hello” to the British King of German descent, or something?
No doubt about it, boys and girls — the high and once mighty Windsors are old news now, and good riddance too.
Today’s “nobles” — a bunch of lazy, selfish, gutless, Globalist worthless eaters and perverts who provide spectacle and circus for the “has been” subjects of dying un-jolly old England. // Image 3: Only a Rothschild can stick his finger in royalty’s chest like that.
There was a time when the word “nobility” actually meant something. The French term “noblesse oblige” (literally “nobility obliges”) meant that royalty / nobility extends beyond mere titles and privileges — requiring the monarch and the “blue bloods” to fulfill social responsibilities. Even in serfdom days, when those who lived on the nobles’ land had obligations to the “lord,” the Nobleman in turn had obligations to the people’s welfare — including, most of all, protection. And the Lord’s cut of the crops was a far lower percentage than what we-the-tyrannized pay in direct and indirect taxes today.
Examples of truly “noble” (protective) attitudes and measures would include:
* England’s King Edward I expelling the Jews in 1290 * Hungary’s King Louis I expelling the Jews in 1360 * France’s King Charles VI expelling the Jews in 1394 * Spain’s King Ferdinand & Queen Isabella expelling the Jews in 1492 * Portugal’s King Manuel I expelling the Jews in 1496 * Austria’s Queen Maria Theresa expelling the Jews from Bohemia in 1744 * Russia’s Tzarina (Queen) Catherine the Great banishing Jews to western territories in 1791
Hmmm. There seems to be a pattern here.
These “anti-Semitic” decrees (just to list a few) were all issued in protective response to the usual suspects committing the usual dirty deeds — you know, stuff like coin clipping, well poisoning, ritual sacrifice of a kidnapped Christian child and, of course, the most common “canard” ™ of them all — usurious & ruinous money lending. Notwithstanding the shortfalls of a system of hereditary monarchy, the Christian monarchs of days-gone-by generally had the best interests of their subjects at heart.
So, whatever happened to “noblesse oblige?”
During the tumultuous century following the formation of Adam Weishaupt‘s Illuminati (New World Order secret society) in 1776, the nobility of just about every country in Europe sustained a relentless bloodbath of assassinations and “close call” assassination attempts at the hands of Red radicals and deluded “nationalists” carrying out the policy of “propaganda of the deed” — in which a suicidal assassin would gain eternal notoriety by sacrificing his own life (“taking one for the team”) by publicly murdering an Emperor, King, Queen or Prince (Presidents & Prime Ministers too). There was absolutely no one that Rothschild’s Reds couldn’t get to, or at least get close enough to scare. Even England’s Queen Victoria had eight attempts made against her (here).
In due time, personal fear of death and revolution — combined with the golden carrot of favorable Rothschild finance and flattering Jewish press (a mighty weapon which “the goyim” carelessly allowed to slip from their hands) — led to the “democratic” domestication of much of Europe. This was then followed by the “if-ya-can’t-beat-em-join-em” corruption of the surviving monarchies — England in particular.
This bit of undeniable history is also boastfully summarized in the turn-of-the-century “hoax” known as The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion. From Protocol 1: Point 26
“This helped us to our triumph: it gave us the possibility, among other things, of getting into our hands the master card – the destruction of the privileges, or in other words of the very existence of the aristocracy of the Goyim — that class which was the only defense peoples and countries had against us.
On the ruins of the natural and genealogical aristocracy of the Goyim we have set up the aristocracy of our educated class headed by the aristocracy of money. The qualifications for this aristocracy we have established in wealth, which is dependent upon us, and in knowledge, for which our learned elders provide the motive force.”
And so, after having terrorized, neutered and Judaized the British and European Monarchies for so long, “noblesse oblige” is about to become “nobles obliterated” as (((they))) will gleefully flush the rotten royal remnants down the toilet bowl of history.
“It is untrue that I or anyone else in Germany wanted the war in 1939. It was desired and instigated exclusively by those international statesmen who were either of Jewish descent or worked for Jewish interests. I have made too many offers for the control and limitation of armaments, which posterity will not for all time be able to disregard for the responsibility for the outbreak of this war to be laid on me. I have further never wished that after the first fatal world war a second against England, or even against America, should break out.”
— Adolf Hitler, Final Testament, April 29, 1945
1. Averting war with UK Prime Minister Chamberlain in 1938 // 2. Making peace with French Marshal Petain in 1940
Adolf Hitler’s numerous and reasonable offers of peace to the Allied powers are a matter of indisputable historical record. Establishment Court Historians (Fake Historians) cannot deny the reality of these reasonable offers, so they choose to simply ignore them instead.
(((They))) know that if the truth of Hitler’s pleas for peace were to become widely known, it would stand the conventional narrative of World War II (and subsequent events) on its head. Consider the following true statements and events, and decide for yourself who the “aggressor” behind World War II really was.
1939 Hitler proposes peaceful solutions to the problem of the ‘Polish Corridor’
After World War I, the victorious allies had carved up German territory and given part of Germany (Western Prussia) to the newly re-established nation of Poland. Eastern Prussia was left isolated; totally cut off from Germany. Tensions among Poles, Jews and minority Germans simmered in the area.
To resolve the problem, Hitler makes numerous sensible proposals; which include: demilitarization of the key port areas, public referendum, accepting Gdynia as a Polish port city on the Baltic Sea, 1 km wide rail & road passages to link Eastern Prussia to Germany, or to link Poland to the Baltic Sea.
Finally, as attacks against Germans living in Poland escalate, Hitler proposes that the region be placed under International control. Every German proposal is ignored. We now know that, behind the scenes, US President Roosevelt had been pressuring Poland to not make any deals with Germany.
“BERLIN THINKS DOOR IS LEFT OPEN TO PEACEFUL SOLUTION”
Even the pre-war August 28th headline of the Hitler-hating New York Times confirmed that Hitler sought to avoid war with Britain & France. Hitler’s thoughtful letter to France is published in full.
Six years before the war was to even start, International Jewry had already declared war against Germany. The “Polish Corridor” was to serve as the match which lit the flame.
LATE AUGUST – SEPTEMBER 1939 In 11th hour attempt to avert war, Hitler calls for emergency talks between Germany and Poland
Just three days before the actual outbreak of what was to become World War II, Britain agrees to come to the Poland’s assistance in the event of a conflict with Germany (Anglo Polish Military Alliance). This unnecessary deal emboldens the Polish and Jewish militias who want the West to wage war upon Germany. To force Hitler’s hand, terrorists begin murdering German civilians in large numbers. A British ex-Pat named William Joyce describes the events:
“On the nights of August 25 to August 31 inclusive, there occurred, besides innumerable attacks on civilians of German blood, 44 perfectly authenticated acts of armed violence against German official persons and property. These incidents took place either on the border or inside German territory.
On the night of August 31, a band of Polish desperadoes actually occupied the German Broadcasting Station at Gleiwitz. Now it was clear that unless German troops marched at once, not a man, woman or child of German blood within the Polish territory could reasonably expect to avoid persecution and slaughter.”
And yet, just prior to ordering the invasion of Poland (September 1, 1939), Hitler is still trying to resolve the situation peacefully by summoning the Polish Foreign Minister for talks. Unbeknown to Hitler, the fix was already in. After the 3 week German-Polish War ends in victory for the Germans, Hitler declares:
“I attempted to find a tolerable solution. I submitted this attempt to the Polish rulers. You know these proposals. They were more than moderate. I do not know what mental condition the Polish Government was in when it refused these proposals. As an answer, Poland gave the order for the first mobilization, and my request to the Polish Foreign Minister to visit me to discuss these questions was refused. Instead of going to Berlin, he went to London.”
Germans of all ages massacred in Poland. This type of nasty business had been going on for months as “the international community” remained silent.
OCTOBER 1939 Hitler pleads with Britain & France to rescind recent war declarations.
Before the actual shooting was to start in the Western theater, Hitler did all could to reassure Britian & France of his peaceful intentions. The two Allied powers had, under the pretext of saving Poland, both declared war upon Germany on September 3, 1939. Before the Reichstag, and the world, Hitler declares:
“I have always expressed to France my desire to bury forever our ancient enmity and bring together these two nations, both of which have such glorious pasts. ….I have devoted no less effort to the achievement of Anglo-German understanding, no, more than that, of an Anglo-German friendship. At no time and in no place have I ever acted contrary to British interests…”Why should this war in the West be fought?”
Britain (and later France) declares war. Meanwhile, Hitler declares peace!
MAY 1940 Hitler deliberately allows the British Army to escape at Dunkirk
The German “blitzkrieg” across Holland and Belgium, as well as the earlier occupation of parts of Denmark and Norway, had denied the Allies of the opportunity to encircle Germany before invading it. As a show of good faith, and over the objections of his own Generals, Hitler then allows the trapped Allied forces to escape untouched from the beaches of Dunkirk (France). Hitler hopes that this gracious act will make the British more willing to make peace. General Gunther von Blumentritt, in describing the reasons behind Hitler’s decision regarding Dunkirk, later explains:
“He (Hitler) then astonished us by speaking with admiration of the British Empire, of the necessity for its existence, and of the civilization that Britain had brought into the world. ….He compared the British Empire with the Catholic Church saying they were both essential elements of stability in the world. He said that all he wanted from Britain was that she should acknowledge Germany’s position on the Continent. The return of Germany’s colonies would be desirable but not essential, and he would even offer to support Britain with troops if she should be involved in difficulties anywhere.”
It is interesting to note that, in recent years, some Establishment historianshave been permitted to talk about Hitler’s halt order for what it was — an offer of peace.(here)
The Allied army could have easily been captured at Dunkirk, but Hitler allowed them to escape. General Blumentritt reveals Hitler’s admiration for the British and his desire to end the war.
MAY 1940 After having defeated France and chasing the British invaders off of the continent, Hitler, via Swedish third party, proposes generous peace terms to Britain
The Germans contact the British ambassador in Sweden, Victor Mallet, through Sweden´s Supreme Court Judge Ekeberg, who is known to Hitler’s legal advisor, Ludwig Weissauer.
According to Mallet:
“Hitler, according to his emissary [Weissauer], sincerely wishes friendship with England. He wishes peace to be restored, but the ground must be prepared for it: only after careful preparation may official negotiations begin. Until then the condition must be considered that discussions be unofficial and secret.
Hitler´s basic ideas [are that] today´s economic problems are different from those of the past […] In order to achieve economic progress one must calculate on the basis of big territories and consider them an economic unit. Napoleon tried, but in his days it wasn’t possible because France wasn’t in the center of Europe and communications were too hard. Now Germany is in the center of Europe and has the necessary means to provide communication and transportation services.
England and America now have the best fleets and will naturally continue to, because they will need the oceans for their supply. Germany has the continent. In what concerns Russia (USSR), Weissauer has given the impression that it should be seen as a potential enemy. “
Hitler´s peace proposal is as follows:
1- The British Empire retains all its Colonies 2- Germany´s position on the continent will not be questioned 3- All questions concerning the Mediterranean and its French, Belgian & Dutch colonies are open to discussion 4- Poland. A Polish state must exist 5- The former Czechoslovakian states remain independent but under German protection.
Ekeberg understands that this implies that the states occupied by Germany would be de-occupied. Germany´s occupation was only due to the present war situation. Churchill is not interested in making peace.
1. Excerpt from “Himmler’s Secret War,” by Martin Allen // 2. Thanks to Churchill, German peace efforts via Sweden failed. Ambassador Victor Mallet (left) walking with Princess Elizabeth (now Queen Elizabeth) and Prince Phillip.
MAY 1940 Churchill turns down Mussolini’s offer to mediate peace between Germany and Britain
On May 25, 1940, Giuseppe Bastianini, the Italian ambassador in London, requests a meeting with British Foreign Secretary Lord Halifax to discuss Italy’s neutrality. Halifax meets Bastianini later that afternoon. The discussion soon moves to that of Italian mediation between the Allies and Germany.
Bastiani reveals that the goal of Italian leader Benito Mussolini (Hitler’s ally) is to negotiate a settlement “that would not merely be an armistice, but would protect European peace for the century.” Halifax responds favorably to the idea and takes it to the British War Cabinet.
The following morning Halifax gives his report, telling the Cabinet that in his opinion they “had to face the fact that it was not so much now a question of imposing a complete defeat upon Germany but of safeguarding the independence of our own Empire.”
Halifax summarizes his meeting with Bastianini and urges his colleagues to consider Italian mediation. Again, Churchill would have none of it!
For several days, Halifax continues to press for the Mussolini mediation. In an apparent attempt to placate Halifax, Churchill finally says that he “doubts whether anything would come of an approach to Italy, but that the matter was one which the War Cabinet would have to consider.”
But Churchill is lying to Halifax. Never did Churchill even consider Mussolini’s offer to mediate peace between Britain and Germany. The matter eventually dies. The conflict between Churchill and Halifax became known as ‘The War Cabinet Crisis.’
Instead of accepting any peace offers, Churchill’s gang chose to frighten the British public with idiotic tales of imminent poison gas attacks from Hitler.
1. Halifax (r) tried very hard to convince the warmonger Churchill (l) to at least hear Mussolini’s mediation proposal. // 2. Mussolini, shaking hands with UK Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain in 1938, had helped Britain and Germany to keep the peace of Europe at the Munich Conference of 1938. That’s when Churchill wrongly condemned Chamberlain as an “appeaser” – a slanderous label that has clung to Chamberlain ever since.
JUNE 1940 Hitler drops “peace leaflets” over London!
With Germany now in total control of the continent and riding high in “the driver’s seat”. Hitler continues his campaign for peace by bypassing the British press and air-dropping leaflets explaining the causes of the senseless war, and ending with “an appeal to “reason”.
EXCERPT:
“In this hour I feel it to be my duty before my own conscience to appeal once more to reason and common sense in Great Britain as much as elsewhere. I consider myself in a position to make this appeal, since I am not the vanquished, begging favors, but the victor speaking in the name of reason. I can see no reason why this war must go on. I am grieved to think of the sacrifices it will claim.
I should like to avert them. As for my own people, I know that millions of German men, young and old alike, are burning with the desire to settle accounts with the enemy who for the second time has declared war upon us for no reason whatever. But I also know that at home there are many women and mothers who, ready as they are to sacrifice all they have in life, yet are bound to it by their heartstrings.
Possibly Mr. Churchill again will brush aside this statement of mine by saying that it is merely born of fear and of doubt in our final victory. In that case I shall have relieved my conscience in regard to the things to come.”
1- Dropped over London // 2- British ‘Black propagandist’ Sefton Delmer (of Jewish heritage) keeps the war-fires burning by mocking Hitler’s peace leaflets. // 3- Ignorant British soldier shown laughing as he reads Hitler’s leaflets.
Over on the other side of the Atlantic, the Fake News in response to Hitler’s air-dropped appeals was just as bad. — (New York Daily News)
NOVEMBER 1940 The Vatican’s ‘Papal Nuncio’ (ambassador) presents Hitler’s peace proposal to British officials
This excerpt from ‘Himmler’s Secret War’ describes a meeting held in Spain between the Papal Nuncio and British officials Hoare and Hilgarth in Spain; and the latest peace offer from Hitler:
“The nature of the concessions that the German Fuhrer was prepared to make in order to obtain peace with Britain must have astounded the men at the head of SO1. This was not even a deal worked out through a process of hard negotiation. It was Hitler’s opening gambit….an offer so generous and pragmatic that it would be very tempting to anyone who genuinely wanted peace.
His (Hitler’s) offer of such remarkable concessions was an extremely threatening development. Should the terms become public, it had the potential to render British resolve to stand firm against German aggression to a shuttering halt.”
Neither the Pope’s prayers nor his emissaries could sway Mad Dog Churchill’s gang away from their warpath.
May 1941 The Amazing Peace Mission of Deputy Fuhrer Rudolf Hess
Deputy Fuhrer Rudolf Hess is Hitler’s “Right Hand Man” and long time friend. He is Germany’s 2nd in command, or perhaps 3rd (behind Air Marshall Goring). In May of 1941, at a time when Germany is winning the war, Hess (who is fluent in English) flies a solo mission over Scotland and parachutes in with an offer of peace.
Hess is attempting to link up with what he believes to be British anti-war patriots. His goal is to end the war and, according to Stalin (whose agents infested the UK hierarchy), to make a pact against the Soviets. Instead, he falls into Churchill’s hands; to be held in solitary confinement for the duration of the war.
After the war, Hess is sentenced to life in East Berlin’s Spandau Prison. With the liberalization of the USSR in the late 1980’s, there is talk of finally releasing him. But he is said to have committed “suicide” in his cell in 1987. Many believes that the 93-year-old Hess was murdered so that details of his peace mission would remain buried forever.
One couldn’t be any closer to Hitler than Rudolf Hess. Right: Old man Hess was imprisoned for nearly half a century. The public was to remain ignorant of his peace mission.
1940, 1941, 1942, 1943 Hitler maintains a standing generous peace offer on the table. Churchill, by his own admission, refuses to accept!
At all times, the Hitler-Hess offer of total cessation of the war in the West remains on the table. Germany offers to evacuate all of France except Alsace and Lorraine, which would remain German. It would evacuate Holland and Belgium. It would evacuate Norway and Denmark. In short, Hitler wants to withdraw from Western Europe, except for the two French provinces and Luxembourg (Luxembourg was never a French province, but an independent state of ethnically German origin), in return for which Great Britain would agree to an attitude of benevolent neutrality towards Germany.
In addition, Hitler is ready to withdraw from Yugoslavia and Greece. German troops would evacuate from the Mediterranean and Hitler would use his influence to arrange a settlement of the Mediterranean conflict between Britain and Italy. No country would be entitled to demand reparations from any other.
As Churchill leaves London to meet Roosevelt for a conference in Quebec late in the summer of 1943, a reporter asks if they were planning to offer peace terms to Germany. Churchill replied:
“Heavens, no. They would accept immediately.”
Again, in a 1944 letter to his ally, the mass-murdering Bolshevik Joe Stalin, Churchill reassures Stalin that Britain will remain at war with Germany. In so doing, Churchill confirms the undeniable reality of Hitler’s generous peace proposals:
“We never thought of peace, not even in that year when we were completely isolated and could have made peace without serious detriment to the British Empire, and extensively at your cost. Why should we think of it now, when victory approaches for the three of us?”
Churchill and FDR were very chummy with the great mass-murderer Joseph Stalin; who worried that German peace offers might be accepted by his Western Allies.
APRIL 1945 Berlin Bunker: Hitler’s Final Testament
On April 29, 1945, with the Red Army closing in, Hitler dictated the final public communication of his life, My Political Testament. Right up until the very end, when he had nothing to gain, Hitler wanted the world to know that he had never wanted war. Here’s a telling excerpt:
“More than thirty years have passed since 1914 when I made my modest contribution as a volunteer in the First World War, which was forced upon the Reich.
In these three decades love and loyalty to my people have guided all my thoughts, actions and my life. They gave me the strength to make the most difficult decisions ever to confront mortal man. In these three decades I have spent my strength and my health.
It is untrue that I or anyone else in Germany wanted war in 1939. It was wanted and provoked solely by international statesmen either of Jewish origin or working for Jewish interests. I have made too many offers for the limitation and control of armaments, which posterity will not be cowardly enough always to disregard, for responsibility for the outbreak of this war to be placed on me. Nor have I ever wished that, after the appalling First World War, there would ever be a second against either England or America.
Only three days before the outbreak of the German-Polish war I proposed a solution of the German-Polish problem to the British Ambassador in Berlin – international control as in the case of the Saar. This offer, too, cannot be lied away. It was only rejected because the ruling clique in England wanted war, partly for commercial reasons and partly because it was influenced by the propaganda put out by international Jewry.”
Hitler wasn’t lying — not in his Final Testament, not ever. The bloody war which either killed, maimed or traumatized scores of millions of innocent people, and has stunted the progress of western civilization ever since, did not have to happen. What a shame. What a damn shame.
1. Hitler enjoying the 1936 Berlin Olympics — Given what we have just learned about Hitler’s numerous attempts to first prevent, and to then stop the war – the claims of innocence made in his Final Testament do indeed ring true. // 2. The opinion presented in Hitler’s Testament is supported by the private diaries of famed British authors Harold Nicolson and Evelyn Waugh, who quote the 5th Duke of Wellington (Image 2) on the day war broke out as saying: “It’s all the fault of the anti-appeasers and the Jews.”
These are Just FACTS that History has decided to just ignore since it doesn’t go along with the ever ending rhetoric.
“Even if you go back into 1917, that was the worst of all time, but it was also not as bad as here. It was very bad, it was very rough. It was a bad one, but it wasn’t quite like what we’re going through right now.” ********************************
Released in December 2019, the film titled 1917 was widely acclaimed and decorated with awards — including the Golden Globes awards for Best Motion Picture Drama and Best Director. Not having seen the film, we will refrain from reviewing the story which is set against the ghastly battlefield of World War I. It’s interesting to note that out of the five individual years which encompassed “The Great War” (1914-1918) the filmmakers chose the holy year (for many Jews) of 1917 for its title — instead of 1914, 1915, 1916 or 1918. Maybe it’s just a coincidence — or maybe it’s a message among “their crowd.” Who knows?
But the number does offer us a good “teachable moment” for explaining the history-altering significance of 1917 — a year that was very good for “the usual suspects” (so good that (((they))) made a museum exhibit in its memory) — yet utterly disastrous for so many millions of “goyim.” We now republish a popular Anti-NY Times piece which originally appeared in one of our 2017 issues.
A FLASHBACK CLASSIC
Herbert Johnson’s anti-immigration cartoon (with “anti-Semitic” overtones) from the era, titled “Make This Flood Control Permanent.”
New York Times: Revisiting 1917, a Year That Reverberates for Jews Around the World
A museum exhibit set to open this weekend at the National Museum of American Jewish History in Philadelphia and later this year at the American Jewish Historical Society in New York will focus on three historic events and their impact on Jews (evidently, no one else really matters). The exhibit titled, “1917: How One Year Changed the World,” will feature America’s entry into World War I, the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia and the Balfour Declaration.
Though much of what this particular Slimes article tells of these three events is indeed accurate, the deception lies in what is omitted about this sad centennial. Let’s dive in and see what we mean.
Two major Jewish museums are teaming up to school their flocks on 1917 — but their exhibit leaves out a few details.
Times: The war and the revolution resulted in strict limits on immigration to the United States, reflecting a fear among Americans that unrest in Europe would spread to their country. The restrictions were not overtly aimed at Jews, but because the quotas from countries with high Jewish populations were tightened, fewer Jews were able to settle in the United States.
The Omission: The restrictions were aimed, in large part, at stopping the influx of Anarchists and Communists who had been causing problems in America since the 1880’s. And it just so happened (surprise, surprise) that many of these subversive characters were of a certain ethnic group.
1 & 2 – 1901: President McKinley was murdered by Leon Czolgosz, an anarchist son of Polish immigrants // 3. The lovely and gracious Anarchist guru Emma Goldman from Lithuania (Russian Empire) defended Czolgosz’s dirty deed.
Times: After the revolution, when the Bolsheviks came to power, and the xenophobia coalesced together and had the power to influence, that fear accelerated.
The Omission: The genocidal Bolshevik Revolution was a Jewish affair. With the exception of front man Lenin (1/4 jew who spoke Yiddish), a review of the roster of Russia’s leading Bolshevik killers reads like the guest list for a Russian-Jewish Bar Mitzvah — Trotsky(Bronstein), Sverdlov, Dzerzhinsky, Litvinov(Wallach), Radek(Sobelsohn), Kamenev(Rosenfeld), Uritsky and many, many more.
The Bolshevik Revolution and subsequent bloodbath were Jewish — no “ifs,” no “ands,” and no “buts” about it!
Times: As the United States was entering the war, there were concerns among Jews over the persecution of those still in Russia and Eastern Europe.
Omission: Apart from the fact that the “persecution” of the chosenites was greatly exaggerated, it is important to note that the Communist movements of the other nations of Eastern Europe were also led by the usual suspects — Bela Kun in Hungary; Max Goldstein in Romania: Rosa Luxemburg in Germany et al. It is understandable that the good Christian people of these nations might come to justifiably resent the Jewish-led drive for a Bolshevik Europe.
Times: Not all Jewish immigrants viewed the United States as a safe haven. A handful of documents highlight the little-known story of Boris Reinstein, who came from Russia and made a career as a druggist in Buffalo. His 1917 application for a passport is on display, as is his 1923 renunciation of his United States citizenship. Mr. Reinstein was a true believer in the Bolshevik Revolution and the Soviet ideology and left his wife, Anna, to return to Russia, where he worked in the Library of the Marx, Lenin and Engels Institute.
Comment: An interesting and useful little truth gem which validates our points of argument. Thanks Times!
Blah-blah-blah…Always soapbox rabble-rousing on behalf of “the people.” Trotsky (Russia), Kun (Hungary) Luxemburg (Germany)
Tiimes: The Balfour Declaration, meanwhile, expressed Britain’s support for a Jewish home in Palestine. For Dr. Perelman and Rachel Lithgow, executive director of the American Jewish Historical Society, one gratifying coup was the loan of two draft versions of the Balfour Declaration from the financier Martin Franklin…This was the text that was forwarded to Lord Balfour and was used as the basis of the Balfour Declaration. Arthur James Balfour, for whom the declaration is named, was Britain’s foreign secretary. The final declaration, in the form of a letter dated Nov. 2, 1917, was sent to one of Britain’s most distinguished Jewish citizens, Baron Lionel Walter Rothschild.
Ultimately, it said, in part: “His Majesty’s government view with favor 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.” The document also added that “nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine.”
Omission: Solid history, but the direct linkage between the Balfour Declaration and America’s entry into World War I is oh-so-conveniently “forgotten” about.
A wealthy New Yorker named Benjamin Freedman, a former aide to Bernard Baruch, later split with his fellow Jewish millionaires and “blew the whistle” on The Balfour Declaration and Zionist treachery in general. Freedman at his finest, from a 1961 speech at the Willard Hotel in Washington:
“Let me show what happened while we were all asleep……
World War I broke out in the summer of 1914. … There are few people here my age who remember that. Now that war was waged on one side by Great Britain, France, and Russia; and on the other side by Germany, Austria-Hungary, and Turkey. What happened?
Within two years, Germany had won that war: not alone won it nominally, but won it actually. The German submarines, which were a surprise to the world, had swept all the convoys from the Atlantic Ocean, and Great Britain stood there without ammunition for her soldiers, stood there with one week’s food supply facing her — and after that, starvation.
At that time, the French army had mutinied. They lost 600,000 of the flower of French youth in the defense of Verdun on the Somme. The Russian army was defecting. They were picking up their toys and going home, they didn’t want to play war anymore, they didn’t like the Czar. And the Italian army had collapsed.
Now Germany — not a shot had been fired on the German soil. Not an enemy soldier had crossed the border into Germany. And yet, here was Germany offering England peace terms. They offered England a negotiated peace on what the lawyers call a status quo ante basis. That means: “Let’s call the war off, and let everything be as it was before the war started.”
Well, England, in the summer of 1916 was considering that. Seriously! They had no choice. It was either accepting this negotiated peace that Germany was magnanimously offering them, or going on with the war and being totally defeated.
While that was going on, the Zionists in Germany, who represented the Zionists from Eastern Europe, went to the British War Cabinet and — I am going to be brief because this is a long story, but I have all the documents to prove any statement that I make if anyone here is curious, or doesn’t believe what I’m saying is at all possible — the Zionists in London went to the British war cabinet and they said: “Look here. You can yet win this war. You don’t have to give up. You don’t have to accept the negotiated peace offered to you now by Germany. You can win this war if the United States will come in as your ally.”
The United States was not in the war at that time. We were fresh; we were young; we were rich; we were powerful. They [Zionists] told England: “We will guarantee to bring the United States into the war as your ally, to fight with you on your side, if you will promise us Palestine after you win the war.”
In other words, they made this deal: “We will get the United States into this war as your ally. The price you must pay us is Palestine after you have won the war and defeated Germany, Austria-Hungary, and Turkey.”
Now England had as much right to promise Palestine to anybody, as the United States would have to promise Japan to Ireland for any reason whatsoever. It’s absolutely absurd that Great Britain — that never had any connection or any interest or any right in what is known as Palestine — should offer it as coin of the realm to pay the Zionists for bringing the United States into the war.
However, they made that promise, in October of 1916. And shortly after that — I don’t know how many here remember it — the United States, which was almost totally pro-German — totally pro-German — because the newspapers here were controlled by Jews, the bankers were Jews, all the media of mass communications in this country were controlled by Jews, and they were pro-German because their people, in the majority of cases came from Germany, and they wanted to see Germany lick the Czar.
The Jews didn’t like the Czar, and they didn’t want Russia to win this war. So the German bankers — the German-Jews — Kuhn Loeb and the other big banking firms in the United States refused to finance France or England to the extent of one dollar. They stood aside and they said: “As long as France and England are tied up with Russia, not one cent!” But they poured money into Germany, they fought with Germany against Russia, trying to lick the Czarist regime.
Now those same Jews, when they saw the possibility of getting Palestine, they went to England and they made this deal. At that time, everything changed, like the traffic light that changes from red to green. Where the newspapers had been all pro-German, where they’d been telling the people of the difficulties that Germany was having fighting Great Britain commercially and in other respects, all of a sudden the Germans were no good. They were villains. They were Huns. They were shooting Red Cross nurses. They were cutting off babies’ hands. And they were no good.
Well, shortly after that, Mr. Wilson declared war on Germany.
The Zionists in London sent these cables to the United States, to Justice Brandeis: “Go to work on President Wilson. We’re getting from England what we want. Now you go to work, and you go to work on President Wilson and get the United States into the war.” And that did happen. That’s how the United States got into the war. We had no more interest in it; we had no more right to be in it than we have to be on the moon tonight instead of in this room.
Now the war — World War One — in which the United States participated had absolutely no reason to be our war. We went in there — we were railroaded into it — if I can be vulgar, we were suckered into — that war merely so that the Zionists of the world could obtain Palestine. Now, that is something that the people in the United States have never been told. They never knew why we went into World War One. Now, what happened?
After we got into the war, the Zionists went to Great Britain and they said: “Well, we performed our part of the agreement. Let’s have something in writing that shows that you are going to keep your bargain and give us Palestine after you win the war.” Because they didn’t know whether the war would last another year or another ten years. So they started to work out a receipt. The receipt took the form of a letter, and it was worded in very cryptic language so that the world at large wouldn’t know what it was all about. And that was called the Balfour Declaration.
The Balfour Declaration was merely Great Britain’s promise to pay the Zionists what they had agreed upon as a consideration for getting the United States into the war. So this great Balfour Declaration, that you hear so much about, is just as phony as a three dollar bill. And I don’t think I could make it more emphatic than that.”
**** End quote ***
Yes indeed. That fateful history-altering year of 1917 was very bad for humanity. But it was very “good for the Jews” — as the popular inside-the-Tribe saying goes — which is why the Jewish museums commemorate that fateful year. And that, dear reader, is some serious REAL history.
* Note: On repeated occasions, Trump has referred to his “war against an invisible enemy” and a “deadly scourge” that hasn’t been this bad “since 1917.” The press continually mocks him for being off by one year on “The Great Pandemic of 1918.” But Trump knows exactly what he is saying.
We are living in an ever-more intense “Death Tsunami”; Dr. Sherry Tenpenny tells us.
She says in the UK, 1 in 73 people who got the shot are already dead, according to US government data. She adds, about a 1,000 people a week die, as a result of the coerced vaxx campaign.
About 900 professional athletes have already died – and the number is rapidly increasing, mostly from myocarditis, a result of the vaxxes.
When they first started with the shots in early 2021, Dr. Tenpenny says, we saw hundreds of people with electronic charges – Instagram pics with keys and other metal pieces, clinging to arms and foreheads. You may remember having seen such photos.
This is clearly the result of heavy doses of Graphene Oxide in the shots.
She suggests, they may have changed the formula of the injections, as such pics have largely disappeared – but the substance is still there.
This looks like the first lots were sort of “trial balloons”. They got away with them. Nobody stopped them.
Graphene Oxide, when exposed to hydrogen, takes on a magnetic charge. Dr. Tenpenny refers to hundreds of scientific documents testifying to this.
She reminds us that “they” want 3 to 5 billion people to be eliminated from the planet.
It’s a “slow killing”– sometimes very, very painful. Most people don’t connect the dots.
What Dr. Tenpenny says is substantially the same as expressed as a warning to the world earlier by Dr. Mike Yeadon, former VP and Chief Science Officer of Pfizer.
Dr. Tenpenny ends by recommending that anybody who is listening to this – or gets the message otherwise, should never ever take any Covid shot anymore.
Definitely NO BOOSTERS!
This cautioning also applies to simple flu shots, or combinations of flu-Covid shots – which are now being marketed. Because all these shots – “they” don’t tell you – will contain killer formulas.
Conclusion, yes, indeed, just about a year after the extremely forced shots began – mass-dying started – the death tsunami is flooding humanity, literally.
NY Times: Historic London Synagogue Fights to Stay Out of the Shadows
Rabbi Shalom Morris of London’s three-centuries-old Bevis-Marks Synagogue has got a bee in his beanie over the fact that two proposed buildings would, if constructed, cast shadows upon his historic “house of worship.” The usual “waaah waaah waaah” from one of “the usual suspects”
“If this was next to St. Paul’s Cathedral, it wouldn’t happen.”
Actually, rabbi — if this was next to St. Paul’s Cathedral, the “usual suspects” would be the first ones to argue, with that quintessentially Jewish form of sophistry, something along the lines of: “Because of the separation of church and state inherent in a modern pluralistic democracy, a Christian religious institution has no right to influence the public zoning ordinances of a multi-cultural, multi-denominational metropolis such as London.”
Goy lives — and churches — don’t matter.
* Note: The synagogue is located in the special status area known as “The City of London” — which is different from neighboring national capital of London. The city (aka “The Square Mile) has its own government, its own mayor and its own independent police force. The City is home to the Bank of England and has traditionally been considered the financial heart of the UK.
Rabbi Morris and his crew strongly object to a proposal to build towers near Bevis Marks. Too much shadow.
What grabbed our attention and interest about this article was the sub-headline about the vipers’ den (the oldest in England) being “320 years old” (1701)— which would put its construction at not too many years after the chosenites were permitted back into England. That sets us up for a good “teachable moment” ™ about arch-criminal and temporary dictator (1653-1658) of England, Oliver Cromwell — whose love for the Jews changed the course of world history. The article mentions Cromwell (a historical favorite of the chosenites) —
“Its first worshipers were Jews from Portugal and Spain who fled the Inquisition and were allowed by Oliver Cromwell in 1657 to practice their faith in England.”
Here’s the history:
In July of 1290, King Edward I (“Longshanks”) issued the Edict of Expulsion. The Sheriffs of all the counties of the realm were given four months to clear the chosenites out once and for all. The harsh action was based on the usual charges of the usual suspects being up to their usual business. You know — things like their hateful disrespect for Christianity, coin clipping, extortionate money lending, the ritual murders of Christian children — all of the usual “canards ™” that have continued to “baselessly” pop up from time immemorial. The order would remain in force throughout the rest of the “Middle Ages.”
1. King Edward I booted the Jews out of England. // 2. A shrine to St. Hugh of Lincoln — a 9-year-old English boy tortured and bled to death in a Jewish ritual slaughter in 1255. He was then dumped in a well. // 3. Expelled again and again and again — throughout history — always on the basis of “canards” and “libel.”
Let’s fast-forward 350 years to the 1640’s and the contention between King Charles I and the Puritan faction in parliament — a power struggle which led to two Civil Wars. Cromwell — an Old Testament quoting, Jewish-loving, Puritan religious fanatic — (who was probably funded by Dutch Jews — led the radicals to victory and, a few years later, dismissed Parliament and established himself as “Lord Protector.” In spite of much reluctance among colleagues, Cromwell signed the execution warrant of King Charles. On January 30, 1649, Charles was beheaded. With Charles — whose wife, Queen Henrietta Maria, was a French Catholic — now out of the way, Cromwell and his not-so-pure “almost Jewish” Puritans soon unleashed a terroristic (almost Jewish-like) persecution upon the previously protected Catholic population of Ireland. For all denominations, the celebration of Christmas — deemed sinful by the Old Testament Puritans — was banned. (here)
Though Cromwell’s revolution was short-lived (he died suddenly, perhaps poisoned?) and the monarchy would be restored, his historic 1653 reversal of the “anti-Semitic” banishment allowed the usual suspects to return to England and, over the course of subsequent decades and centuries; go about their usual business until England (and the vast empire which it conquered during that era) was under their financial and political domination. Once squeezed dry like a used-up lemon, “Great Britain” would be chopped up and rolled into Rothschild’s New World Order.
And that, boys and girls, is why (((they))) like Oliver Cromwell so much.
1 & 2. Cromwell and his intolerant Old Testament “Puritans” unleashed Civil War. // 3. Years after Cromwell’s revolution was undone, the unpopular “persecuted” Puritans were the same bunch of psycho fanatics who conducted the Salem Witch Trials and executions in 1690’s America — in which 19 women were hanged, 5 died in custody, and a man was crushed to death under heavy stones.1. King Charles was killed and his Catholic wife, Henrietta Maria, was exiled. // 2. Two of Charles’ children were permitted to visit him before his execution. He bade them a tearful farewell. Just 4 years later, Cromwell invited the Jews to return to England and brought a few of them into his circle of advisers. // 3. Crazy Cromwell brutally crushed Catholic Ireland, but he was very “tolerant” of the Jews.
* From the Jewish Virtual Library:
“Cromwell’s favorable attitude toward the Jews was so marked that, according to his enemies, Jews regarded him as their Messiah.”
Vlad the Bad is really “feeling his oats” these days — and there’s not a darn thing that de-balled NATO, the EU, the CFR, the Soros NGOs, Rothschild, the CIA, the UN, the Jurisprudence nor any of the other weapons (disarmed by Putin’s partner, Donald Trump) of the New World Order can do about it. The article describes the boldness and brazenness of Russia’s “defiance” —
“President Putin asserted that Russia would annex four Ukrainian regions and decried the United States for ‘Satanism.’ In starkly confrontational terms, he positioned Russia as fighting an existential battle with Western elites he deemed “the enemy.”
The speech was an extraordinary combination of bluster and menace, mixing conspiratorial riffs against an American-led “neo-colonial system” with an appeal to the world to see Russia as the leader of an uprising against American power. He referred to “the ruling circles of the so-called West” as “the enemy” — and struck a tone of anger and defiance.”
Oh snap! Did Putin really say “Satanism?” We checked. Yes he did! And not just metaphorically or in passing either — but “outright” Satanism.
Putin:
“Now they have moved on entirely, to a radical denial of moral norms, religion, and family. The dictatorship of the Western elites is directed against all societies, including the peoples of the Western countries themselves. This is a challenge to all.
This is a complete denial of humanity, the overthrow of faith and traditional values. Indeed, The suppression of freedom is taking on the outlines of a ‘reverse religion,’ of outright Satanism. … Do we really want to see perversions that lead to degradation and extinction be imposed on children in our schools from the earliest years, for it to be drilled into them that there are supposedly some genders besides women and men, and offered the chance to undergo sex-change operations?” Tell it, Vladdy. Tell it!
Gored by Putin’s Holy lance, the Piranha Press — in unison — is squealing over being called out for “Satanism.” Wethinks Vlad the Bad is over the target, no?
* Editor’s Note: Interesting timing with this Satanism stuff because Trump operative Steve Bannon recently described Pennsylvania Demonrat Senate candidate John Fetterman as being “someone who hangs out with Satanic Groomers.”
The Russian crest features a knight trouncing the dragon beneath his horse’s hooves. This is derived from earlier historical renditions of Archangel Michael trouncing Satan.
Following are more choice excerpts from a great leader who, after 20 long years of patient and cunning gradualism, is finally in a position of such strength that he may now deliver the truth with neither anesthesia nor apology — and no longer having to politely refer to Globalist scum as “our western partners” but rather, as “Satanists” and “enemies.”
Putin:
“We will defend our land with all the powers and means at our disposal.”
“In 1991, at Belovezh Forest, without asking the will of ordinary citizens, representatives of the then-party elites decided to destroy the USSR, and people suddenly found themselves cut off from their motherland. This tore apart and dismembered our nation, becoming a national catastrophe.”
“The battlefield to which fate and history have called us is the battlefield for our people, for great historical Russia, for future generations, our children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren.”
“Even today, the United States actually occupies Germany, Japan, the Republic of Korea, and other countries, and at the same time cynically call them allies of equal standing.”
1. Russia has liberated FOUR pro-Russian regions of Ukraine for good, in addition to the Crimea from 2014. And de-balled NATO can’t do a darn thing about it because “Patriots Are Now In Control.” // 2. The alleged “sabotage” of Russian pipelines by “Biden” is all just part of the movie. Relax, there won’t actually be any World War III.
Putin’s rhetorical gems and corresponding actions come from a man whom the passionate purists among us once criticized for being too soft on the West — for playing footsies with Russia’s Jewish Oligarchs (who have since fled Russia for Israel, UK and Dubai) — for not recklessly invading Eastern Ukraine back in 2014 — for attending a WEF convention when he was a young security operative — for sucking up to Henry Kissinger — for lighting menorahs with rabbis, etc. Let this serve as a strategic and historical lesson for ye of the backseat “Are We There Yet?” Chorus who get all worked up and start shrieking “psyop!” or “false opposition!” or “Jew puppet!” the moment one of our favorites utters something about “Covid,” vaccines or Ukraine that sounds too Globalese for our taste — or is discovered to have once attended an event sponsored by “fill-in-the-blank” — or just said something way too conciliatory toward the usual suspects. Keep your eye on the ball, boys & girls — not the head fakes!
When confronting a dangerous beast — equipped with the power to implant thoughts into the malleable minds of many millions of normies — it is calm, cunning, and temporary concessions — not passionate frontal assaults — that will win the war in the end. Of course, probably having had advance knowledge of the rise of Q and Trump surely must have made it much easier for Putin to wait out his “western partners.”
He played the long game with Satan’s minions until he no longer had to. Now, he is completely unchained.“What is a unipolar world? However one might embellish this term, at the end of the day it refers to one type of situation, namely one center of authority, one center of force, one center of decision-making. It is world in which there is one master, one sovereign. And at the end of the day this is pernicious not only for all those within this system, but also for the sovereign itself because it destroys itself from within.
Turn on a TV, open a web browser, or scroll social media and you will not be able to avoid headlines and hashtags about Queen Elizabeth II passing away. After news broke that she was under “medical supervision,” media crews have stationed themselves out front of Buckingham Palace and its a veritable red carpet event as royals from all over Europe arrive to pay their respects and offer support.
On Thursday, newly elected British PM Liz Truss said the “whole country” was “deeply concerned” over the news of The Queen’s deteriorating health.
“My thoughts – and the thoughts of people across our United Kingdom – are with Her Majesty The Queen and her family at this time,” Truss stated.
Hours later, and surrounded by her royal family, Queen Elizabeth II took her last breath. Now, all the constant reporting has turned to memorializing her.
But is the queen really someone to be hailed as this expounder of all that is good? Should her face be plastered on screens worldwide and a 24/7 memorial be rolled out in her honor? Maybe so, but not for the reasons corporate media will tell you.
On top of mothering a child predator and helping to cover up his crimes, Queen Elizabeth — during her time as a monarch — fleeced the taxpayers of England for hundreds of millions just to pay for her castle.
During this time, she hid her finances offshore — despite the fact that the Royal Family is tax exempt — and made countless billions off the backs of her subjects.
She also oversaw the horrific colonization of multiple territories in Africa and Asia in which people were savagely tortured, their land stolen, and their people slaughtered.
She was tortured with axes during Kenya's struggle for independence from British colonial rule.
As Britain celebrates the Platinum Jubilee of its monarch, this old fighter wants to send her a message: "Let Elizabeth bring what belongs to me." pic.twitter.com/EofKAOqFtW
Africa, asked to celebrate the life of #QueenElizabeth, you only celebrate it correctly by showing what exactly the British did to our ancestors! Subjugation. Torture. Murder. Slavery. Looting of our resources. Don't edit history. Don't use euphemism. Say it the way it is! pic.twitter.com/fz5kpMpW65
Though the Queen-friendly press have tried to downplay her role in the slaughter mentioned above, her racist roots were exposed in a document released last year by the Guardian. The papers revealed that the Queen’s courtiers banned “coloured immigrants or foreigners” from serving in clerical roles in the royal household until at least the late 1960s — when it was no longer considered “acceptable.”
It wasn’t just torture, racism and covering up her son’s affinity for children either. In one of the most damning admissions to date by the Church of England, the head of the church admitted in 2017 they “colluded” with and helped to hide the long-term sexual abuse of children and young men.
Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby apologized to the victims who spoke out and helped bring their attacker to justice in 2017. However, according to the report on how the church handled the case, as well as the slap on the wrist ex-bishop Peter Ball received for decades of abuse, ‘justice’ is a loosely thrown around term.
According to the AP, Welby ordered the report after Ball was convicted and imprisoned in 2015 for misconduct in public office and indecent assaults against teenagers and young men over a period of 20 years.
Despite admitting to sexually abusing 18 people, this serial child rapist was let out of prison after only serving 16 months.
The roots of the Church of England go back to the time of the Roman Empire when Christianity entered the Roman province of Britain and is the official state church of Britain. And, the supreme governor of the church is the Queen herself.
When not covering for pedophiles or overseeing torture, the Queen was also sympathizing with Nazis. In 2015, the Queen was seen on video giving the Nazi salute, during Hitler’s rise to power.
As TFTP reported at the time, in the video the Queen and the Queen’s mum raise their Nazi salutes proudly for the camera.
According to the Sun:
The film shows the then Princess Elizabeth, just seven, larking about in 1933.
Egging on her sister Princess Margaret, three, is their uncle Prince Edward, Prince of Wales. He was a sympathiser towards Hitler’s Nazi Germany and became King Edward VIII.
The stunning film footage of the Queen performing a Nazi salute is today revealed by The Sun.
The astonishing clip lay hidden for eight decades. The grainy home movie is thought to have been shot in 1933 or 1934, as Hitler rose to supreme power in Germany.
It is a matter of historical record that Edward VIII was, in fact, a Nazi sympathizer which makes the claims of childhood fun by the Queen to defend the video, all but irrelevant.
It gets worse, intelligence given to the FBI claimed the Nazis were using the Duke and Duchess to glean information that would scuttle the war effort of the allies and help the Nazis win.
When the Queen isn’t saluting the regime responsible for the horrid deaths of 6 million Jews, she exploiting poor and mentally ill individuals.
As TFTP reported, the release of the Paradise Papers, a leak comprised of over 13.4 million documents, exposed the Queens insidious exploits of the mentally ill.
The documents included in the leak came from two offshore services providers and the company registries of 19 tax havens, which was obtained by the German newspaper Süddeutsche Zeitung and shared by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists.
The report from ICIJ claimed that according to records from the offshore law firm Appleby, Queen Elizabeth II’s private estate has invested millions of pounds in a Cayman Islands fund that has a history of taking advantage of poor families:
“Queen Elizabeth II has invested millions of dollars in medical and consumer loan companies, Appleby’s files show. While the Queen’s private estate, the Duchy of Lancaster, provides some details of its investments in U.K. property, such as commercial buildings scattered across southern England, it has never disclosed details of its offshore investments.
‘Yes, the Duchy was aware that the Jubilee Absolute Return Fund was run offshore,’ said Chris Addock, chief finance officer of the Duchy of Lancaster.
The records show that as of 2007, the queen’s private estate invested in a Cayman Islands fund that in turn invested in a private equity company that controlled BrightHouse, a U.K. rent-to-own firm criticized by consumer watchdogs and members of Parliament for selling household goods to cash-strapped Britons on payment plans with interest rates as high as 99.9 percent.”
According to a report from the Guardian, which partnered in sharing the revelations from the Paradise Papers, over the span of more than a decade at least, the Queen’s estate has made significant investments in businesses such as the off-license chain Threshers and the retailer BrightHouse.
In 2017, BrightHouse, which is Britain’s biggest rent-to-own retailer, was ordered to pay 14.8 million pounds to 249,000 customers after the watchdog Financial Conduct Authority found that the retailer was guilty of overcharging customers and intentionally taking advantage of people with mental health problems and learning disabilities.
So, to recap, the queen has overseen horrifying torture and occupation for decades, covered for pedophiles, exploited people with disabilities for personal gain, fleece her subjects for billions in tax revenue, and has a history of sympathetic intentions to the Nazis. And, this is by no means, a comprehensive list… there is still much more.
Her legacy is not kindness, altruism and majesty — it is colonization, brutality, land disposition, mineral theft and torture.
During #QueenElizabeth’s reign, my country was a British protectorate that oppressed my peoples, set up our entire #torture system that is active, and made sure the self imposed monarchy stayed in power by cracking down on any attempts to bring about basic rights and freedoms.
After knowing all this, we have to ask ourselves why… why is her face plastered all over televisions, computers, and newspapers? Why are thousands going to weep in the streets for her? Why will corporate media make her out as a hero?
This is not normal. The queen was a monarch, an unaccountable, legally immune descendent of a long line of brutal dictators who continued that role — and no, it wasn’t merely “symbolic.” Society needs to stop celebrating people like this. If we continue to make role models out of abusive tyrants, don’t be surprised when society starts to resemble that very thing.
The Queen’s Death Comes at a Moment of Great Uncertainty for Britain
Long an Uneasy Prince, King Charles III Takes On a Role He Was Born To
Queen Elizabeth II, like her great great grandmother, Queen Victoria, reigned (in theory) over Great Britain for many years — close to 64 and 71 years respectively and 135 of the past 182 years — with a few shorter-lived Kings reigning briefly in between. Of course, the real power “behind the throne” of the far flung colonial empire that is no more was not the British Monarchy, but rather The House of Rothschild which seized the island’s finances following the “Napoleonic Wars” and, in the ensuing decades, took control of its media and parliament. By the time Queen Victoria (of the German House of Hanover) was crowned in 1837, the monarchy was not only politically detached from the parliament, but the parliament itself danced to Rothschild’s tune. Two-time Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli was openly linked to the Rothschild’s, as was political leader Randolph Churchill – Winston’s alleged father.
* Note:We say “alleged” because Winnie’s mom, Jenny Jerome, was abed-hopping trollop of the lowest order – but I digress.
Apart from not at all embodying the political power of Rothschild’s Island, neither lady — nor any of the men in between — ever really boldly asserted themselves in terms of expressing opinions on matters political or economic. The only exception was King Edward VII(Elizabeth’s uncle). Edward’s previous praise (while still a prince) of Hitlerhad already placed him in the cross-hairs of “the usual suspects.” Soon after ascending the throne in January, 1936, Edward continued to cause a stink in parliamentary circles with words and actions that were interpreted as “interference in political matters.” During a tour of poverty-stricken villages in South Wales, for example, Edward commented that “something must be done” for the unemployed coal miners. This simple empathetic comment, uttered during the Great Depression, was actually criticized as an attempt to guide government action — even though he had not proposed any policy.
In December of 1936, after less than one year as King, Edward was forced to abdicate the crown to Prince George, his stuttering brother and Elizabeth’s father — the phony pretext being that he was married to an American divorcee, Elizabeth Wallis Simpson. You see, the planned war with Germany would be impossible to pull off with an outspoken “pro-Hitler” King on the throne.
1. Queen Victoria was of the German Hanover line. // 2. Victoria’s spouse, Prince Albert of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha, came straight from Germany. // 3.In 1917, the First World War caused King George V (Victoria & Albert’s grandson and first cousin to both Kaiser Wilhelm of Germany and Tsar Nicholas of Russia) to officially change the family name from the German “Saxe-Coburg & Gotha” to the current “Windsor.” Edward VIII had an activist streak and a political bent — including admiration for Hitler — which could not be tolerated. A pretext was cooked-up to force his abdication in 1936. The following year, Edward visited Hitler with his American wife. Just look at how both of them light up in his presence.
This bit of history brings us to the new King, Charles. Unlike Victoria and Elizabeth, but very much like his granduncle Edward, Charles has not been one to shy away from making political statements and openly advocating for policy changes. Heck — Charlie makes Edward seem shy in comparison! However, unlike Edward, Charles has always remained in good standing with both the UK Judenpresse and the parliamentary class. Why the double standard, you ask?
It’s very simple. Goofy Charlie’s political forays — specifically his advocacy of the Climate Con and his condemnation of Vlad the Bad — align perfectly with those of “The House.” It’s not that royals aren’t allowed to dabble in politics. If the political posturing is “correct,” then a prince, a queen, a king etc may speak as he please, provided it pleases Rothschild and the Global Crime Syndicate. Unless the White Hats have this creep (who, for all we know, may have had his ex-wife, Diana, murdered) under some sort of submission, expect to hear more nonsense coming from the pretend “king” of England. It’s also possible that, as King Charles, he may decide to finally keep quiet on these matters, especially since his brother, Andrew, was hooked up with Mossad pedo-sex-traffickers Epstein & Maxwell. Either way, we hope he will keep his stupid mouth shut. Better yet, we’d like to see someone shut his treasonous mouth, literally.
The Queen is dead. Short-lived be the King.
* This just in from reader Tom K: The number of days between Q’s very first post on October 28, 2017 and the Queen’s death is 1776 — the year during which the American colonies declared their independence from the Britain of Queen Elizabeth’s great great great great grandfather, King George III. Coincidence?
1. A Global Warmist // 2. A Putin-hater // 3. Not many people can get away with disrespectfully sticking a finger in Charles’s chest. Rothschild can!
Excerpts from ‘The British Mad Dog’ // By M S King
CHURCHILL THE PLAGIARIST AND ALSO THE USER OF GHOSTWRITERS
In light of his severe alcoholism, his high-life-living and his record of academic mediocrity, one has got to wonder how this puffed-up “literary giant” is able to muster the time and discipline necessary to author so many well-written books. Well, you see, the “prolific” multi-millionaire writer not only has the help of “literary assistants,” (ghostwriters) but he is also a plagiarist!
A young historian Maurice Ashley contributes heavily to Churchill’s widely-acclaimed 1937 ‘A History of the English-Speaking Peoples’. Years later, another historian named William Deakin pens an enormous amount of material for Churchill, including most of the text of his “widely acclaimed” series on World War II. The military narratives are supplied by a retired general, Sir Henry Pownall.
By the 1950’s, an aging and alcohol-addled Churchill is relying upon an entire team of writers to do much more than just research, contribute, and edit, but really take over his work.
The multi-million pound one-man literary enterprise that was Winston Churchill was not a one man show after all. — Ashley, Deakin and Pownall.
In addition to his reliance upon ghostwriting historians, the imitation intellectual also engaged in gross plagiarism. British historian Max Hastings, writing in The Telegraph, November 2, 2004, informs us:
“Pownall, ironically enough, had often confided to his own wartime diary rage and frustration about Churchill’s intemperate interferences in military operations. Now, for a salary of £1,000 a year, along with a less influential naval counterpart, he played a key role in the fortification of the Churchill legend.
Churchill skillfully injected into the narrative just sufficient rolling phrases in his own inimitable style to put a personal stamp upon the published version. The opinions and judgments expressed were, of course, entirely his own. But, from the delivery of the first volume onwards, some critics, including Life magazine which had paid vast sums for serial rights, expressed misgivings about countless pages of contemporary documents rendered verbatim in the text, to make up the weight.
By the time of the third volume, Life’s Henry Luce was growling: “The old boy is chiseling on us. If he were younger, we’d kick him in the shins.” Churchill narrowly averted litigation for plagiarism from Samuel Morison, an American naval historian whose narrative of the Pacific sea battles was recycled in the former Prime Minister’s volumes.”
Henry Luce, the legendary founder of LIFE Magazine, came to understand that Churchill was a money-grubbing plagiarist.
MID 1930’s CHURCHILL THE FORGER, BROKE AND DESPERATE, RESORTS TO SELLING FAKE PAINTINGS
Just how desperate was Churchill’s financial situation during the 1930’s? Noted British historian and master document digger David Irving informs us:
“Churchill of course is no stranger to counterfeit art. In dire financial straits in the 1930s he took to faking the paintings of the deceased French impressionist Charles Maurin because Maurin’s signature sold somewhat better in the Left Bank boutiques in those days than did his own.
President Franklin D Roosevelt spotted the little deception, and wrote him a joshing letter about it in February 1942. For some reason those letters never made it into the official volumes of Churchill Roosevelt correspondence — an omission I have rectified in “Churchill’s War”, vol. ii: “Triumph in Adversity”. Now that’s Real History. Spreads like Butter.” (8)
Roosevelt had come to learn of the scam from a fine arts expert in Washington DC. Irving, in another article, quotes from the teasingly friendly 1942 letter in which Roosevelt writes to Churchill as though it is not known who the forger is:
“Dear Winston — these people who go around under assumed names render themselves open to all kinds of indignity and suspicion.” (9)
Having hinted at blackmail, Roosevelt mischievously added:
“The British Embassy was asked for verification and I suppose the matter has been to Scotland Yard and back again.” (10).
In ‘Churchill’s War: Triumph in Adversity, historian David Irving uncovers a 1942 letter from FDR to Churchill in which the former teases the British Mad Dog – a mediocre painter – about a 1937 scam in which Churchill put impressionist Charles Maurin’s names to his paintings – and then sold them to boutiques!
The World We Live In 