January 21, 2004To the Parliamentary Party, where there was discussion about the next Queen's Speech. Ann Cryer [MP] said we needed a managed immigration policy, based on ability to find jobs; not on finding a wife or husband with a British passport, which is putting enormous pressure on young Asians.
Jon Owen Jones [MP] told a story about an Algerian who had brought three people into the country by marrying and divorcing three times. It was all a scam, he said, and time we put a stop to it. Amen to that.
Despite the hoo-ha over asylum, we've barely touched the rackets that surround arranged marriages. What mugs we are.
The trouble is we are terrified of the huge cry of 'racism' that would go up the moment anyone breathed a word on the subject. There is the added difficulty that at least 20 Labour seats, including [Foreign Secretary] Jack Straw's, depend on Asian votes.
43 comments:
Keep trying to convince yourself there's no conspiracy Laban. It's not as if there's reams and reams of evidence for the agenda for the creation of a World Government. It's not as if it's very easy to join the dots and see that mass immigration, political correctness (cultural Marxism) and all the rest aren't part of the attempt to destroy the nation state and national identity of the British, particularly the English.
They can't help it because they've been programmed and conditioned to be that way.
On the subject of mind control this excellent article, 'Brainwashing: How The British Use The Media for Mass Psychological Warfare' is worth a read. We've been under a sustained psychological assault for a very long time.
"Beyond this interacting network, there are millions of participants involved in the production, distribution, and transmission of media messages, whose thinking, in turn, has been shaped by the content of the media product, and who are, effectively, self-brainwashed by the culture within which they live."
There has certainly been a conspiracy to hide elements of the truth- look at the revelations in yesterday's Sunday Times about the Home Office's wilful obstruction of legitimate FOIA requests from their sacked ex employee Steve Moxon.
Moxon knew 'Operation Brace' was tantamount to a 'let them in and don't ask questions' immigration policy. He said as much to the ST in 2004- and was sacked by the Hmoe Office for his pains. Home Office ministers and/or senior civil servants then effectively trashed the Freedom of Information Act but witholding disclosure of relevant documents for FOUR YEARS, until they were forced into the open by the Information Commissioner. The documents now at last in the public domain show that Moxon's suspicions were correct, and that ministers and officials colluded in an attempt both to save face, and deceive the public about the rationale behind 'Operation Brace'.
The Telegraph has a further article about this today-
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/labour/6526568/Home-Office-visa-fast-track-risked-allowing-dangerous-immigrants-to-settle.html
This looks like a grubby little conspiracy to me !
I am another one of those who have occasionally commented in here encouraging Laban to pay more attention to the so-called "conspiracy theorists". But I don't know if I am a conspiracy theorist myself, since I don't really know what exactly a conspiracy theorist is.
Personally, while I agree with Laban on the ill-effects of the vacuum produced by the decline of Christianity and of the ill-effects of 60s counter-culture on the minds of NuLabour idiots, I really think he should be looking a little deeper.
Yes, many of our elites are just clueless liberals. Some of them are self-hating Marxists. Some of them care for absolutely nothing beyond neoliberal economics. Some of them are ethnic "minority" aggressors. These groups are all naturally anti-nationalist. And since the political zeitgeist is anti-nationalist, those who are really just self-serving careerists with no real principles at all will also proclaim to be anti-nationalist.
But these anti-nationalist and socially liberal forces are mirrored throughout the Western world, and they have been building for decades - since before the 60s in fact.
Revolution Harry always has some good info.
Off the top of my head, I would also encourage readers to do some research on Coudenhove-Kalergi's vision for the EU.
And here is an interesting article about George Soros and his mission to wreck Eastern Europe. This is a bit of how the world works ...
http://educate-yourself.org/cn/georgesorospostmodernvillian31aug04.shtml
laban has to maintain that there was no conspiracy. Because like most conspiracies it works roughly like this, the main provocateur (individual or group) recruits a small innercircle of people who are really in on 'the truth', those people then use propaganda and other manipulation (such as hijacking genuine issues) to recruit a large number of useful idiots who then do most of the work in pushing the agenda of the original provocateur.
An example of this is "global warming" a total con that thousands of young westerns believe in, which is actually just another attempt at pushing a form of communism.
Laban like most of the student far-left movement (including many commenters here) thought they were so clever and are never going to admit that they were just someone elses tools.
Revolution Harry
I watched/read your links.
They are both quite interesting.
A few thoughts popped into my head:
Firstly, Karl Popper demonstrated very effectively that Freudianism is bad science. In fact he was able to show that Freudianism is not science at all, but an enclosed belief system. Rather like a religion.
Therefore, any system of brain washing based on Freudianism is doomed to failure.
Secondly I read a book a few years ago called 'A Man called Intrepid'. A large part of the book was about MI6 operations based out of the Rockefeller Centre in New York when the USA was still neutral in WWII. Most of the effort of SIS was directed toward shifting American public opinion in our favour rather than James Bondery. This ties in with the claims of the Russina in the first link.
None of this means I believe any of it though, or, that I do not believe it.
"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 galleys, heard in the very hall of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor- he speaks in the accents familiar to his victims, and wears their face and their garment, and he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all 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, 42 B.C.
Mbison,
Educate Yourself is a great site and it's one of the many I've used in order to research and cross reference the World Government agenda. Of course there's actually a bit more to it than that but in its simplest form that's what it amounts to. The speculation isn't about whether or not such a conspiracy exists but who or what is at the top of the pyramid. One thing's for certain it's not the Blair's, Bush's, Brown's or Obama's of this world. They're way down the pecking order.
Anon 9.12, your quite correct in your explanation as to how it works. Only those at the top of the pyramid know what the real end game is. There are many different strands, all working towards the same aim. The global warming scam was cooked up by the Club of Rome (Al Gore is, of course, a member), one of the many elite think tanks and organisations involved in the overall agenda. Other strands involve the general Fabian, international Marxist left and the globalist capitalist (corporatist) right. What was it Tony Blair said about global forces all moving in the same direction. The sad thing is that the climate changer's, multiculturist's and EU advocates have no idea of what's really going on.
Apart from being hard to admit there's been a lot of effort put into to ridiculing the very idea in order to put all 'sensible' people off looking into the subject. It's only when and if you take the time and effort to do some research that a picture starts to emerge. Sad to say it isn't pretty.
Capitao,
I can't comment on Karl Popper I'm afraid. I'm sure they've moved on in the ensuing years. All I've come to realise is that mind control, mass psychology, brainwashing etc is a very important weapon in the war being waged against us. Their latest thing appears to be neuro-linguistic programming.
Keeping an open mind is essential when looking into all this but I assure you the more that you do the more you realise that something extremely sinister is at work.
“To play those millions of minds, to watch them slowly respond to an unseen stimulus, to guide their aspirations without their knowledge - all this whether in high capacities or in humble - is a big and endless game of chess of ever extraordinary excitement.” -- Sidney Webb, former leader of Fabian Society
Laban,
I don't wish to sound tart, but you seem to be putting yourself through mental gymnastics here to avoid the obvious conclusion before your eyes.
Thid government came to power seeking to increase immigration without telling the public that was their plan. How can that be a cock-up and not a conspiracy?
There is another way of looking at this and that is just that New Labour were mostly just an exceedingly cynical crew who were really only interested in power and staying in Government.
They created a funny money booming economy by letting house prices get out of control. The booming economy created jobs. These jobs could have been filled by the unemployed, but rather then deal with that problem (see Ed West's blog in today's Telegraph) they sucked in immigrants. The whole situation was viewed as cynical win win for them.
As Laban says, its just the way they are.
On the other hand...
Revolution Harry
“To play those millions of minds, to watch them slowly respond to an unseen stimulus, to guide their aspirations without their knowledge - all this whether in high capacities or in humble - is a big and endless game of chess of ever extraordinary excitement.” -
You mention Neuro Linguistic Programming (NLP) I am not an NLP practitioner but I've read a few books on it and been to Tony Robbins events. Tony Robbins uses NLP. In fact I use stuff I've picked from NLP every day in my job without even thinking about it as its become habitual.
Like a lot of things, they aren't that scary when you understand them.
I got a job as a door to door salesman when I was 20. We had cult-like training. I was astonished how easy it was to get people to sign on the line using simple techniques. However, I noticed that most of the people that signed on the line were not that bright.
I suspect there is a link with IQ.
The point being that control and manipulation techniques will only work on a certain segment of the population. Others will either know there is an attempt to manipulate them or will suspect it.
I hardly watch much telly because it seems like propaganda.
The average IQ in this country is 100, so that is the level of propaganda you would choose for maximum effect.
Maybe as Steve Sailer says:
The goal is not to impose hypocrisy, but stupidity.
If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human mind -- forever.
All political power is held by conspiracy. It cannot be held otherwise. There is nothing surprising in this fact, or rather, there is nothing more surprising therein than that groups of school-children, company-executives, or marketing-men conspire against particular rivals and against the general outgroup, the scope whereof may extend to the public at large. The most pertinent questions in this regard are not whether there are conspiracies, but rather of their nature and aims, of their size and scope, and of the relative degrees of their deliberate and systematic aspects, wherewith one ought not to make oneself prey to, nor indeed be put off by, the silliest and the unfairest connotations which tend nowadays to be associated with the word. It seems that the air of the modern grand conspiracies is composed of the mixed effusions of ideologies, group-rivalries, plans, and plots, which many men breathe together, some knowingly and others unknowingly, an air which is made increasingly heady and anesthetic by the heightening and centuries-long trend of sensate-beastialisation and massification which afflicts modern men, such that, these poor herd-animals, in their everyday lives, are increasingly driven by general images rather than by intelligible or personable thoughts. In short, the modernistic age is the most sinister, and the least rational and personable, of any age in the history of our species — quite against the image which it has formed for itself. Anyway, in view of this fascinating subject, and as good acolytes of the masters such as Le Bon and Lippmann, Bernays and Frist, perhaps you gentlemen might forgive me if I foully propagandise my own contribution to the tradition of the black arts, with my humble guide on how to commit genocide .
One more thing, that perhaps, to an extent, ties all this together...
If you can get hold of a copy of a book called 'Prawn Cocktail party'.
Its about the rise of New Labour and its full of all sorts of fascinating stuff about links with organisations that are fronts for the CIA etc.
A great read.
This is not a conspiracy, because conspiracy implies something secret, and there is nothing secret about the Labour cabinet's connection with the radical left. Mandelson was a marxist with known connections to the KGB. Charles Clarke was a Marxist. There are many others. Then in the media you have people like Andrew Marr, also a former Marxist.
But are they "former" marxists or just marxists that keep their goals quiet?
Socialism is an interim stage on the way to communism, and whilst the Russian approach was violent revolution followed by the "terror" as proposed by Engels, the British way follows the path of the Fabians/Gramsci. Slow step by step progress in the direction of Communism whilst brainwashing society on the journey.
We know MI5, CND, the Unions and the Labour Party were all infiltrated by the KGB. We know from Orwell's "Keep the Aspidistra Flying" just how deeply the universities were infected with Marxism. We also know that "1984" was written to warn of the dangers of "English Socialism" being taken over by Gramscian Marxists and becoming like Stalin's Russia.
How difficult is it to believe that is exactly what has happened? Not exactly a secret conspiracy, but an in-your-face Marxist revolution covered over with the kind of "big-lie" propaganda which is straight out of Goebbel's training manual.
They hated Thatcher because she saw through the "big-lie" and started taking the Gramscian Marxist project apart. They hate the English because they saw through Foot and Kinnock and rejected them at the ballot box.
The only question I have is "do they still believe in this revolution, or is their real plan to destroy Britain as a challenger to the Gramscian project elsewhere?". My guess is that the Russians are still paying - nobody has quite worked out where Mandelson is getting his money right?
Tory Party and Labour Party both believe in the EU project and in "Global Warming" propaganda. They are singing from the same socialist hymn sheet surely?
Problem is that lies are told to keep the truth out, and as Socialists of all kinds have found out, the truth has a habit of violently re-asserting itself.
I agree with Deogolwulf. Perhaps we should not be asking 'is there or is there not a conspiracy?' but rather 'what is the nature of the power elite?'
I'm with Laban in so far as we agree (I think) that the problem with our rulers is with their beliefs rather than their competence.
But it seems obvious to me that it goes beyond that. It is not just that our rulers are too ideologically blind to see the damage they are doing. Some of them might be, but not all of them. At the highest levels - we're talking the international power elite here - the agenda is clearly the abolition of the nations of the West, which entails the abolition of their native populations.
To Anon-at-2.36pm, do you have any more info on Thatcher taking the Gramscian project apart? My understanding is that it was her growing opposition to the EU that finished her, but that she merely applied the brakes on the Gramscian project in Britain rather than doing anything to reverse it.
I would also add that I believe Thatcher's neoliberal internationalist capitalism made things worse for us in terms of the preservation of our nation, not better.
@Capitão Nascimento
It is tempting to think of them as cynical or stupid, but these folk all went to the best Universities in the UK. They know what they are doing, at least from a political standpoint, and they know why. They act in unison and there has been no general breakdown in discipline over the last 12 years because they believe much the same thing.
They probably only argue about the smaller details of how to bring about Communism in the UK. It is my belief that they have two competing strands of thought on the path to Communism:- either simply destroy the UK as a nation and focus on the EU as the center of a Gramscian/Fabian Marxist project, or set up the nation to fall into civil disorder and civil war at some point in the next 20 years and then use the outbreak of this disorder as a pretext for using existing emergency powers under the terrorism act and the civil contingencies act to take full control.
I urge everyone to read "1984" with this in mind. George Orwell was a member of the Labour Party and was well aware it was infiltrated by Communists. Remember that since that time the moderates were driven out of the Labour Party and were forced to set up the SDP, leaving the radical left behind. Orwell would have been driven out into the SDP too, if he had lived long enough. Really only radicals remain inside the Labour Party, the apparent shift to the "right" is just window dressing behind which many atrocities against democracy are perpetrated by the radical left, just as Orwell feared.
Orwell feared English Socialism's totalitarian instincts and in "1984" he doesn't just describe to us the outcome of those instincts, he describes how the new world order will develop.
In "1984" "Oceania" is the EU. Orwell describes how Britain's borders will more or less be erased in one huge superstate with the same socialist beliefs. He describes how there will be a civil war between essentially facist elements and socialist elements - note that currently we have a socialist government permitting mass immigration which then results in the rise of facist elements against which the socialists are the natural enemy. Notice how the long-term denigration of facism plays into the hands of the socialists, because by creating a false dichotomy with the facists seen as "evil" they ensure that the popularity of socialism will rise in response to any rise in popularity of facism. Since the facists will not be able to take power at the ballot box (and indeed it could be said that they have no interest in seizing power at the ballot box since their primary desire willbe to force out the immigrants) civil war is the likely outcome with the facists unlikely to win as they will have neither numbers nor weaponry on their side. The socialists will then use the terrorism act and the civil contingencies act to take compete control of the UK, probably in about 2040, ostensibly to protect the people from the rise of facism. Thus it is my belief that the Fabians/Gramscians are deliberately introducing mass immigration in order to foment civil disorder and the rise of facism which they will then be instrumental in supressing using the full force of laws that they have already passed a generation earlier (by which time their original intent will have been forgotten by the people).
Part II
Orwell correctly anticipated that Labour and the radical left would use language rules to brainwash the people into believing certain things and to prevent the discussion of certain things. He correctly anticipated that the BBC would be used to spread propaganda and disinformation. He correctly anticipated the use of the "big lie". He correctly anticipated the growth of a huge underclass (the proles) seduced by drink and pornography that the state would have no interest in, where the middle class would be the ones that would be controlled. He correctly anticipated that normal heterosexual relationships would be scorned in the new world order. He correctly anticipated the end of real art, science and literature. He anticipated how we would be spied upon by state cameras. He anticipated that society would be atomised by the state and therefore unable to rise up an unite against the state. He correctly anticipated the re-writing of British history. He correctly anticipated the gradual descent into poverty and despair of society, with the state continually excusing itself. He correctly anticipated the engagement in pointless wars without end to whip up patriotic fervour. He correctly anticipated that the radical movement would develop a personality of its own and replicate itself with each new generation.
Orwell didn't correctly anticipate all these things because he had a wild imagination (if you read all his works you will be aware that all are based on personal experience) - he correctly anticipated them because he had seen the "master plan" from the Fabians and wished to challenge it in a way that would win its publication without risking it being denounced as "thought-crime" by placemen of the radical left in the media.
The title of this book is of crucial importance. The original title was to have been "The Last Man in Europe" - an emotive title for sure. So why change it to something of apparently little meaning? Because "1984" is 100 years after the founding of the Fabian society.
Well this looks distinctly conspiratorial - from Migration Watch
"A policy change by Labour?
3 The most obvious change was the massive increase in work permits which were quadrupled between 1997 and 2007. A key moment was a speech delivered by Mr Blunkett, as Home Secretary, to the Social Market Foundation on 26 June 2002. Having remarked that most asylum seekers were actually seeking economic migration, he continued:
"So why not facilitate that economic migration? Why not open up in greater degree the opportunity for people to come here, to work here, to develop their family here openly and legally. I have doubled the number of work permits this year to 150,000. We have opened up new immigration routes in terms of skilled workers and in terms of those who are coming for a short stay or for seasonal work. We need, in Government, to get agreement in service sector, low skill, no skill work, to be able to do the same..
In other words, there is a massive social as well as economic agenda. But to sell it to the British people and to avoid the fear of change and flux which always creates tension and the danger of racists exploiting it, we need to do that effectively and legally. We need to have integration programmes that work."
4 It was also Mr Blunkett who said on the Newsnight programme on 12 November 2003 that there was "no obvious upper limit" to the number of immigrants who could settle in the UK. He said that Britain had always been "crowded" and that the (then) current net inflow of 172,000 was sustainable."
Hatters may not be a malignant, but Blunkett assuredly is
Whither now?
I reckon a John Felton(1628) moment is a very distinct possibility over the next 12 months
Anon 2.36, what you say is correct but I'm afraid there are more 'layers to the onion' than the outer Fabian one. That could best be described as semi-secret. You have to ask yourself why the Tory party believe in the EU, global warming and mass immigration. The agenda is being advanced from several directions. Careful attention should be paid to the role the Royal Institute of International Affairs (Chatham House) has played in all this.
"My guess is that the Russians are still paying - nobody has quite worked out where Mandelson is getting his money right?"
Try the Rothschild's as representative of the banking interests. The central pillar of their control system is banking and the ability to create money out of thin air. At the very least try not to think in terms of nationalities. The 'elites' know no borders and operate in all counties, including Russia.
MBison the question 'what is the nature of the power elite' is an important one. Even here we have lots of firm evidence of certain parties being clearly implicated. I could give you my considered opinion, based on an awful lot of research on the subject but I'd have to back it up with some evidence which would not suit the comments section of a blog.
Anon 5.22, it's important to remember that the Socialism/Communism on offer will only be for the masses. Royalty, aristocracy and the super rich will not be affected. Indeed they will form the ruling class.
Your observation that we seem to be moving towards some sort of social unrest is almost certainly correct. My guess is that Islam will prove to be the catalyst for this. There's no way whatsoever that the 'elites' aren't fully aware of the nature of Islam and yet they still appease and encourage. It's here we stray into the 'spiritual' nature of the agenda. Let's just say it isn't just a 'one world' government, army and financial system they want but a one world religion as well. Guess who's involved in this aspect of the agenda?
Wall Street funded Communists. One more piece of the puzzle.
Anon 2:36 PM
We know from Orwell's "Keep the Aspidistra Flying" just how deeply the universities were infected with Marxism.
I read that some 25 years ago or so. I still have a copy. I don't recall the Universites infiltrated with Marxismn bit.
Anon 5:22 PM
In "1984" "Oceania" is the EU.
I always thought it was the remains of the British empire plus USA.
http://preview.tinyurl.com/yczorzg
Oops. I missed out South America.
This kind of speculation is all jolly good fun. Buts its a bit like talking about 9/11.
I don't beleive the official story but that doesn't mean I will automatically believe the airplanes were holograms flown by illuminati trained lizards controlled by space aliens.
To mangle a line for Rumsfeld:
There is stuff we know we know.
There is stuff we know we don't know.
And there is stuff we don't know we don't know.
Do I lose sleep at night worrying about the stuff I know I don't know and the stuff I don't know I don't know?
No.
Its fun to speculate, and it may be useful at some future time, but it is important to keep your feet firmly planted on the ground.
"I don't beleive the official story but that doesn't mean I will automatically believe the airplanes were holograms flown by illuminati trained lizards controlled by space aliens."
Who, anywhere, is claiming this? Yes the official story is nonsense and nobody is asking you to believe "the airplanes were holograms flown by illuminati trained lizards controlled by space aliens."
By all means keep your feet on the ground. That's exactly what you should do. But while you're doing it make sure to research and look into all the carefully documented *evidence*.
My guess is that the Russians are still paying - nobody has quite worked out where Mandelson is getting his money right?
Russians or would that actually be 'Russians'?
I think a some what diufferent group are involved though some of them may actually be 'Russian'.
Most of the 'Russian' oligarchs have something in common - something in common with Mandelson as well and George Soros has already been mentioned - he seems very anti-Russian. And by some happy coincidence Freud and Marx just happen to have the same thing in common.
Its all a coincidence though, nothing to see here, move along.
Underpinning the Left's genocidal policies is the Holocaust Lie. All here who have resisted conditioning so far - are you able to approach this subject with an open mind?
Revolution Harry
I wrote my last post because I suddenly found myself possessed by the spirit of Ray Peterson, played by Tom Hanks in The 'Burbs.
Of course, if you've seen that film, you will remember that in the final twist it turned out that Ray's friends and neighbours ere right about the Klopeks all along.
I don't think it's right to speak of the left trying to head towards communism any more, (excepting holdouts like Scargill etc)
Since the fall of the USSR they've had to look elsewhere for support and it's led to the 'third way' of essentially fascist style economics, big government making the decisions and private firms being milked for capital.
As for the whole conspiracy think, I'm a firm believer in the adadge "Never ascribe to malice that which can be explained by incompetence."
Sgt Troy,
David Blunkett was leader of Sheffield Council until 1987. It was denounced as being the most radically left-wing council in Britain having amongst other things declared itself a nuclear free zone. Blunkett's popularity within the Labour Party rose as a result. By 1997 he was being presented as a natural part of the cabinet of a Party that claimed to have moved well over to the right and be the "heirs to Thatcher". Meanwhile the media is infiltrated to such an extent that this "big lie" is presented without so much as a murmur of dissent.
What does that tell you about what is happening in the UK? There isn't a "conspiracy". It really is "in-your-face". They are relying on the propaganda of Goebels to pass it off as something far less sinister.
The public has short memories - nobody like Blunkett should ever have been allowed near power. His policies were bound to be a danger to British democracy because he has never believed in democracy, but the public forgot about his past. The "big lie" was used to pass his immigration policies off as inevitable, opponents are shouted down as "racist" and "xenophobic" and the "useful idiots" in the media are manipulated into presenting the immigration as if it were desirable. Meanwhile other elements of the radical left outside of Labour like George Galloway start to engage with the Muslims. Ther are fomenting trouble and division because it suits their gameplan. The Guardian newspaper offers a platform form radical Muslims, presenting them as moderates. Of course, the Muslims kicked off too soon and if it wasn't for the prompt action of the police over 3000 people would have been killed by British Muslims over the last few years. Strange that the police seemed to know exactly who to look for once the killings started....
Part II
There is no Illuminati, no George Soros, no Bilderberg group, no Freemason, no 9/11, and no Jewish conspiracy in the UK. There is only the radical left, and all these other conspiracy theories have been thrown out in the public domain by the radical left to distract attention from what is really going on and to undermine the opponents of the radical left. The radical left don't need to keep things secret, they don't even try. Their discussions are out in the open, but their flagrant disregard for democracy is so outrageous we actually delude ourselves into believing that they couldn't be doing what they so obviuously ARE doing - deliberately destroying Britain. Can anyone believe that the Labour Government deliberately set up the Hutton enquiry so that an inquest into the cause of death of Dr David Kelly would not be held and therefore the official cause of death being suicide would never be challenged? And yet that is EXACTLY what they did, flagrantly and with the media not saying a word. Who needs 9/11 conspiracies in the face of such audacity? The radical left is few in number but they are pulling all the strings. Each individual has their own part to play. They know the gameplan. Orwell knew the gameplan too, and he had hoped that by writing it down in a work of popular fiction he could expose the tricks to the world and set off the allarm bells each time they were used.
George Orwell was wrong about one thing. Big Brother wasn't a stern Stalinist figure, he looked like a bank manager, and came across as someone that an ordinary man might trust, someone that appeared to have our best interests at heart. Behind that kindly, gentle figure was a cabal of known Marxists with extreme views, but the media seem to have quietly forgotten that NuLabour had a blood red core.
To defeat NuLabour's Marxist agenda we need to start by listing the members of the radical left and uncover their connections. A simple website listing each individual, their connections, a political biography and their level of Marxist commitment would be a good start. The internet has a much longer memory than the general public. We must not forget that the "useful idiots" that are not part of the Marxist agenda but are easily manipulated by it also play their part in promoting the Gramscian gameplan without being fully aware of it. This is virtual McCarthyism. It must not stop at Labour politicians but must also expose those in the media, the arts and the universities At the same time we must expose the agenda behind mass immigration regularly through comments on the internet so that the mechanism the Marxists hope to use will be exposed. People will not believe it at first but the drip,drip drip of the truth will start to connect with the reality of the actions of the radical left and then they will be exposed. At the same time we must stand againt the rise of those facist anti-democratic movements that are on the rise in resposne to Islam. These movements are nothing more than pawns in the gameplan of the radical left, and indeed there is reason to bewlieve that they may actually have been deliberately set up by it.
Putting 'Conspiracy' in the title of this post has certainly stirred things up, seeing the number & length of some of the comments here.
FWIW I think there is good evidence now unfolding that the unprecedented level of immigration to the UK over the last decade was a chosen outcome on the part of NuLab. It wasn't a just incompetence or a cock up, and the motives of some of the officials who facilitated it are murky, to say the least.
I also happen to be a Eurorealist, and am suspicious of the 'carbon credits' cooked up as a 'solution' to 'man made' climate change. However, unlike some of the commentators here, I don't see all these phenomena as interlinked, and as evidence of some overarching global conspiracy (by the Jews/Freemasonry/International Finance Capital/Take Your Pick). And I'm not blindly refusing to 'join up the dots'; I just refuse to believe that adding 2+2 necessarily makes 5, which is what 'big' conspiracy theories usually amount to.
'To defeat NuLabour's Marxist agenda we need to start by listing the members of the radical left and uncover their connections. A simple website listing each individual, their connections, a political biography and their level of Marxist commitment would be a good start.'
I think anon 10.34 has a point here. What he seems to be asking for is something akin to Daniel Brandt's 'Namebase' website- but applied to '68ers and their descendents, not CIA affiliated spooks, assets, & crooks. Sadly, a right of centre, UK based incarnation of Daniel Brandt doesn't appear to exist (sigh).
@Nascimento: I apologise. I didn't quite get the quote from "Keep the Aspidistar Flying" (1934) correct. It actually goes like this:-
"Every public school has its small self-conscious intelligentsia. And at that moment, in the years just after the War, England was so full of revolutionary opinion that even the public schools were infected by it. The young, even those who had been too young to fight, were in a bad temper with their elders, as well they might be; practically everyone with any brains at all was for the moment a revolutionary. Meanwhile the old--those over sixty, say--were running in circles like hens, squawking about 'subversive ideas'. Gordon and his friends had quite an exciting time with their 'subversive ideas'. For a whole year they ran an unofficial monthly paper called the Bolshevik, duplicated with a
jellygraph. It advocated Socialism, free love, the dismemberment of the British Empire, the abolition of the Army and Navy, and so on and so forth. It was great fun. Every intelligent boy of sixteen is a Socialist. At that age one does not see the hook sticking out of the rather stodgy bait."
I think the intent is similar, however.
"There is only the radical left, and all these other conspiracy theories have been thrown out in the public domain by the radical left to distract attention from what is really going on and to undermine the opponents of the radical left."
The 'radical left' are pawns in the game. Follow the money.
"The 'radical left' are pawns in the game. Follow the money."
If you follow the money you will find that 1/3rd of all money is in the hands of the state and it is the left that controls all this money. The Guardian and the BBC are both left-wing organisations that could not survive without the taxpayer.
The left controls all the money, directs how it is spent and infiltrates the top levels of all the organisations where the money is spent.
There is no other organisation with the wealth of the state and the size, direction and scope of the state has been determined by the left. In the US perhaps things are different, but this is not the US. Their conspiracy theories are their's alone.
I used to frequent sunderland labour club for the odd beer as a student in the nineties. As I recall, the barman of the Labour club caused a great deal of outrage when invited to Chris Mullins house for dinner, (Mullins office was directly above the labour club).
Anyway, as Chris's wife (who's Vietnamese) opened the kitchen hatch to ask if anyone wanted anything, the labour club barman jokingly asked for a number 22 and chips. Went down like a shit sandwich I'm afraid, and the chap wasn't asked back.
He served a great Carlsberg export though!
Anon, we're just going to have to disagree on this one. The 'left' is just one part of the overall dialectic. The real wealth, banking and corporate, is where the power lies. Organisations like the Fabians are just one of their many tools.
The 'conspiracy' isn't localised. It's effects are felt in America s much as here. Truth be told though that one of the key power centres is the City of London aka the Crown. If enough people could be made aware of what's really going on and this power were to be confronted, the ripple effect across the globe would be enormous.
Sgt Troy,
do you know 'Felton's epitaph'? It is in the Penguin book of Renaissance verse and very droll it is indeed.
Richard
you can't be serious harry, the Crown has been losing power in recent years not gaining.
What evidence do you have for the Crown losing power? Just to be sure I'm not referring the Royal family (although they are heavily involved).
Well the concept of The Crown is something that belongs to the soul of the nation not the particular reigning monarch, or government. Such as Crown Jewels, Crown dependency, Crown prosecution service (supposed to be apolitical).
Several different countries have their own seperate concept of Crown.
If the guy who wrote that document means something else he needs to get some new terminology.
I wasted my time and read the piece, what a load of rubbish.
Very ameturish attempt.
Things like "Soviets could not have been a genuine threat without media hype". absurd.
There's more to the Crown than the things you mentioned and it certainly doesn't belong to the nation, soul or otherwise. It's main powers are legal, financial and corporate but it should also be noted that the 'Mother lodge' of Freemasonry operates out of the City.
Sorry you didn't enjoy the article. It's nigh impossible to properly express the full extent of what I would suggest is the agenda we face in a short comment. There's much in the article that correlates with other, relevant, information.
I suppose you would have needed to understand how the international banking system operates to have properly understood the question he posed (not statement made) regarding Russia. What he was suggesting was that Russia had (and still has) very poor infrastructure and very little capital. Taking that into consideration he (correctly in my opinion) surmised that their threat was overstated. An enemy is always required. Russia played the part then and Al Queda/Islamic extremism plays it now.
So, 'The Crown' in this context, is a corporation. Any link with the Hanseatic League?
I could google, but I just tried and there is too much stuff to wade through.
So what say you, Harry, in answer to this question?
"Soviets could not have been a genuine threat without media hype".
Actually General Patton shortly after WWII noticed just how weak the Soviets were, in particular with regard to logistics.
General Patton ended up dead following a car accident that may not have really been an accident.
http://preview.tinyurl.com/77kfd2
Anon, yes I've come across the suggestion that Patton's death was more than a little suspicious.
My only conclusion from everything I've read and understood is that the 'rabbit hole' is very deep indeed.
As for the question regarding the Hanseatic League I can only say I don't know. I shall have a little root around and see what I can find.
Laban, if you're still monitoring comments on this post can I suggest the video below by ex navy officer Brian Gerrish. It's his short contribution to the British Constitution Group's recent 'Lawful Rebellion' conference. His arguments may be more persuasive than mine.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zgPShED6jaY&feature=player_embedded
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NjQJq8t5aWA&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kAUYrnAXbxg&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rEdyYTpT5BU&feature=related
I've seen Brian Gerrish talk before (about Common Purpose), and he has some good information.
But comparing the Nazi & Fascist vision for a united Europe with the current European Union is misguided. Does anyone really think the Fascists of the 30s would have conspired to race-replace Europe's people with Third Worlders?
Post a Comment