So with the completely unexpected Bigotgate popping up, I'm going to spend one more post on Justin Forsyth. Brits here might remember that was the incident with a woman called Gillian Duffy that is said to have ended Gordon Brown's premiership. Hmm...staged.
I said in the last post, going by his wiki profile, Justin Forsyth looked like an NPC. Is that the right term? NPC means non-player character...where as maybe PTP might be a better acronym...a part-time player. What I think, it's a profile that someone plays in front of the camera when a talking head is needed, but actually spends most of its time as a name with an important job title, that maybe gets paid a vast real salary.
And if I needed confirmation...what amazingly deep-set eyes you have Justin, and heavy brows, and a strange bobble head. I feel I could grab above the nape of the neck and pull off a whole big section.
Anyway, let's look at the video, I've skipped past Myleen Klass to save you the grief, but her and the presenter have a certain smug look about them throughout the report.
Could we do more to end world hunger? - Channel 4 News, 15 Feb 2012
As Save the Children call for a World Hunger summit, Justin Forsyth, chief executive of Save the Children and the musician Myleen Klass who recently visited Bangladesh with the charity, discuss what can be done
From the transcript at the 1:45 minute mark:
C4 NEWS PRESENTER: How on earth are you going to get this message across to many Britons who are feeling pretty hard-pressed themselves, how are you going to get through to them?
JUSTIN FORSYTH: Well we work in the UK with child poverty here as well, but it's nothing in comparison to what we've just seen in Bangladesh or where I was just a few days ago, in Afghanistan, or in Africa. And I think the Great British public really care about this issue...Actually, interestingly, last year, since we launched this campaign No Child Born To Die; and the first year, we mainly focused on vaccinations, we've had an unbelievable response from the British public. Also Comic Relief has, and I think the British public want us to do good overseas. They also want us to help children at home. So I don't think there's any fatigue in helping people overseas. We've actually had a record income this year.
So, moral of the story...don't be giving money to British oversees children's charities, because they'll just piss it up the wall poisoning children with vaccines. And you won't be able to put the people at the top in prison, because we never see them. Instead we get crossdressing actors in plastic heads parroting Big Pharma narratives to "trusted sources", then disappearing under fake sex scandals.
Watch the blink...that forehead is fake. Cheeks also look solid as he talks.
Justin-Forsyth.gif (1.59 MiB) Viewed 3029 times
And in what universe do those hands on a man make sense next to those woman's hands apparently sitting next to him?
I say apparently...because either Myleen Klass is cross-eyed, or we are seeing something different to what she's looking at. I would suggest the person playing Justin Forsyth has been digitally added in a different place to where he actually is to give the impression he's bigger than he actually is...and remember, this is a Public Service Broadcast News Programme that is now one of our "Trusted News Sources".
I think I'm going to squeeze another one out of this, because I haven't even mentioned Gillian Duffy and Bigotgate.
In my last post I suggested UK elections are fixed, but it's a different type of fixing as the Crown owns all political sides. The point of elections is therefore to manufacture consent in the population through narrative building. Just before Tony Blair contested the 1997 General Election, there were quite major boundary revisions up and down the country...as a practical example, my local seat was Conservative up until the creation of a new constituency in 1997, where upon a candidate parachuted into the area by Tony Blair won. He has held the seat ever since. In later elections it was posited that these boundaries did indeed give Labour an advantage...though this might have also been a narrative device to sell the 2010's Coalition result. It seems to me the Coalition was actually by design, it being a MINDSPACE preparation for the 2016 Referendum. I've long come to this conclusion after revisiting events of the 2010-15 years even before discovering the Yellow & Blue symbolism...that's just the cherry on the top.
In thinking I'd find an image to illustrate what I mean, I came across this Subreddit. I think he's on to something. The Jesuit's dream is to reestablish the map of the Dark Ages, you know, before the Industrial Revolution...that's why they made up the nonsense about evolution, so they could then make up the nonsense about dinosaurs and fossil fuel, so they could then make up the nonsense about global warming...the point, to reimpose a feudal system under reprobates that used to be called "priests" when that system suited, but are now called "experts".
"The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun." — Ecclesiastes 1:9 KJV
But there are more likely to be nine states, in keeping with the numerology of the 999 System.
You may notice that not all EU countries are included - that's intentional. This is an alternate future scenario.
Here's a brief description of what land the regions control
French Gov - Most of France, Wallonia
Lower Rhenish Gov - Netherlands, Flanders, Luxembourg, parts of the German and French Rhineland
German Gov - Most of Germany except Bavaria, some rhineland territory, and some eastern territory
Alphine Gov - Switzerland, Austria, Bavaria, Slovenia
Iberian Gov - Spain and Portugal, sans Catalonia which is independent
Elbe Gov - centered in Prague, includes the Czech Republic, the far eastern parts of Germany, and the western part of Poland. The rest of Poland is independent and anti-EU.
Padanian Gov - Northern Italy. The rest of Italy is independent and anti-EU, often collaborating with Eurasia.
Nordic Gov - Sweden, Denmark, and Norway. Finland and Sapmi are independent allies
Also the EU is supported by the North American federation, while anti-EU movements are supported by the Eurasian Federation (Russian successor state). The UK plays both sides. I am likely going to make an imaginary map for this scenario, so look out for that
Since talking about the boundary changes that were imposed before Tony Blair's 1997 win, there was another notable new seat created. Maidenhead (note the name), west of London. Again, there has only been one occupant of this seat, that of Theresa May...nothing less for royalty.
I know this one is hotly contested because Diana was "so beautiful". But if you look at some of the younger pictures of May, she scrubs up well. If it was just about her looks, I wouldn't be convinced. But it's the in-jokes. They make little sense if she isn't who I suggest, but they are rather droll if she is...so that's where my money is. They gave us a starter-for-ten with Theresa May completely changing her hair style when she replaced Cameron, note the part and the ash tone. That's the picture above of our newly crowned Prime Minister. Likewise, when Theresa May won her Maidenhead seat, this is what she wore...they are both call-backs to that royal blue engagement outfit. With pearl stud earrings in all three pictures.
And you know May's election as PM after David Cameron resigned didn't go to the members. It was a big fix, the other candidate, Andrea Leadsom, withdrew from the contest before it went out to the vote. And as a reminder, in exactly the same way, Labour's Gordon Brown's election did not go out to the members, it was also fixed, as no one in Labour stud against him. And, just recently, pretend millionaire Rishi Sunak's premiership was also an appointment after Liz Truss was removed from office, we can guess, by the King.
Tony was PM for ten years, then Gordon inherited the Premiership without the usual three months Labour circus. Labour leadership elections would appear to primarily be about distraction...or in the case of Jeremy Corbyn, distraction and a way to milk money from young people with the "twenty quid for a vote" carney which they ran twice since they made so much money the first time around.
But back to Bigotgate; this is the event that apparently put pay the Gordon Brown's premiership, and ushered in the the Yellow and Blue of the Coalition...
Gordon Brown calls Labour supporter a "bigoted woman"
I can't get over that Sky news clip was 6:19 minutes. What's that, 28 April 2010, can you imagine Sky running with something so long these days? I can't tell with Gordon Brown whether he had any forewarning, but Gillian Duffy looked like a plant.
But the point is, we are told that the aid Gordon was talking to in the car was Justin Forsyth, I don't see him. Though saying that, are these two the same person?
Insiders insist Mr Forsyth's subsequent departure from the charity had nothing to do with the complaint against him, nor the handling of the Cox scandal. Mr Forsyth was then appointed deputy executive director of Unicef in New York, which he has now resigned from.
Mr Forsyth held senior roles at Oxfam from 1995 to 2004. He took up his special adviser role to Tony Blair until 2007 before becoming Gordon Brown's special adviser until 2010.
Save the Children's new chief executive Mr Watkins has admitted to MPs that the charity had investigated more than 200 complaints of misconduct in 2016 alone.
That second picture, full length in Mail article, has got to be a paste-up, look at the size of Justin Forsyth's head compared with David Cameron's wife Samantha. It's not me making this stuff up, start looking and apparently Labour and the Conservatives are two different political parties, but all the people connected with Tony Blair are exactly the same people connected with David Cameron onwards, and it all seems to feed through Oxford University. Which means the worse of the cancer that affects Western society is concentrated in one place. No coincidence then that the Bullingdon Club is also situated at Oxford.
The Bullingdon Club is a private all-male dining club for Oxford University students. It is known for its wealthy members, grand banquets, and bad behaviour, including vandalism of restaurants and students' rooms. The club selects its members not only on the grounds of wealth and willingness to participate but also by means of education.
The Bullingdon was originally a sporting club, dedicated to cricket and horse-racing, although work meetings gradually became its principal activity. Membership is expensive, with tailor-made uniforms, regular gourmet hospitality, and a tradition of on-the-spot payment for damage. Some members have gone on to become leading figures within Britain's political establishment. These include former Prime Minister David Cameron, former Chancellor of the Exchequer George Osborne, and former Prime Minister Boris Johnson.
The Bullingdon is regularly featured in fiction and drama.
So, I've previously looked at The Bright Society , one of its co-founders being Richard Dawkins, to get the feel of what that club is about. Then the Bright Club, where science and comedy apparently fused to create COVID-19.
And the Bullingdon Club. I'm sure most people have seen this picture of Call-Me-Dave and Boris, apparent chums at Oxford University, where Labour's Ed Miliband, Shadow Secretary of State for Climate Change and Net Zero, also studied at the same time.
That setup on the steps kind of reminds me of this BBC Radio One photo.
Looking closer at that image, we see none of the DJs are looking at the camera. I would suggest that is because it is a paste-up and only some of the people in the picture are actually there, the rest have been added around them to fill the space. If everyone was looking at the camera, it would be immediately apparent that the camera was in a different place even though they were all apparently looking at the same thing. The way around this problem with paste-ups is to make sure no one, or at least only one or two are looking at the camera. And this is what we see above.
Following on from that...If this is a paste-up, then the same person could appear more than once in the picture as different DJs, thus fulfilling what I described in my last post. If these DJs are actually all fictional characters played by actors and the game is never given away, then years later when they are apparently dead, bullshit stories can be made up about them actually being pedophiles with a sideline in necrophilia...And this therefore would equally tell us what greedy sick bastards with no moral compass we have currently running the BBC.
...Currently running the BBC...and the entire country for that matter.
At the risk of further disrupting the flow of this thread, having brought up Theresa May in my last post, I may as well go a little bit further. I've mentioned this point numerous times on Discord, but strangely enough, I don't think in any detail on this forum.
At Theresa May's Conservative Party Conference speech as Prime Minister on 4 October 2017, why did the organisers pick Dancing Queen as the song she walked out on stage to? ...I would suggest for the exact same reason Theresa May chose a Royal Blue outfit the first time she walked out of Number 10 as Prime Minister to address the media.
Theresa May grooves to ABBA's 'Dancing Queen' at Tory Conference
Princess Diana and Prince Charles dancing in Australia (1983)
dancing-queen-1.gif (3.96 MiB) Viewed 2782 times
The interesting thing is. How do we not see it, even when she purposely changes her hairstyle to bring back the retro look?
I could paste up ten or fifteen doubles pictures, but I think the body is more compelling than the face, because May has a distinctive short upper body and long legs...just like Diana.
Interestingly enough, just checking, that iconic picture of Theresa May in royal blue wasn't her first speech as PM, instead this is a grab from that speech, dated 13 Jul 2016. I didn't really follow May's premiership having realised the con with Corbyn and Cameron in 2016, watching any of it just irritated me immensely.
I have just been to Buckingham Palace, where Her Majesty the Queen has asked me to form a new government, and I accepted.
In David Cameron , I follow in the footsteps of a great, modern Prime Minister. Under David’s leadership, the Government stabilised the economy, reduced the budget deficit, and helped more people into work than ever before.
But David’s true legacy is not about the economy, but about social justice. From the introduction of same sex marriage, to taking people on low wages out of income tax altogether, David Cameron has led a 'one nation' government, and it is in that spirit that I also plan to lead.
These people use homosexuality as a pawn; always have...they take the laws to one extreme so they can bring it back to the other. It's all a con...by the CON-servatives. And more importantly to them, it is a direct attack against the Apostle Paul and his letter to the Romans...Paul has always been their main point of attack. That was what he suffered when he was alive, and it is no different now when he sleeps. That's the logic of what they do; and why; to purposely set themselves up as the anti-Christ system.
Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, separated unto the gospel of God, (Which he had promised afore by his prophets in the holy scriptures,) Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh; And declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead: By whom we have received grace and apostleship, for obedience to the faith among all nations, for his name: Among whom are ye also the called of Jesus Christ:
To all that be in Rome, beloved of God, called to be saints: Grace to you and peace from God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ.
First, I thank my God through Jesus Christ for you all, that your faith is spoken of throughout the whole world. For God is my witness, whom I serve with my spirit in the gospel of his Son, that without ceasing I make mention of you always in my prayers; Making request, if by any means now at length I might have a prosperous journey by the will of God to come unto you. For I long to see you, that I may impart unto you some spiritual gift, to the end ye may be established; That is, that I may be comforted together with you by the mutual faith both of you and me. Now I would not have you ignorant, brethren, that oftentimes I purposed to come unto you, (but was let hitherto,) that I might have some fruit among you also, even as among other Gentiles. I am debtor both to the Greeks, and to the Barbarians; both to the wise, and to the unwise. So, as much as in me is, I am ready to preach the gospel to you that are at Rome also.
For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek. For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith.
For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.
Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.
For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.
And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient; Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful: Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.
These chancers want the whole of society to be what Paul describes. Their reasoning being...if society doesn't stand against the depravity, their actions prove they are not slaves of Jesus Christ. And if they are not slaves of Jesus Christ, they are slaves of Caesar, so therefore we can pen them up, steal from them, brand them, inject them, kill them. It's the same mindset the Papacy had in the dark ages, the barbarity that ultimately led to the Reformation. Sooner or later people get sick to death of the corruption and they stop fearing death, and at that point, the society the Babylonian mindset creates, collapses.
This is the same warped Christianity of the first Jewish archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby. Interestingly enough, there has been a call for him to repent from the wider Christian Church...you won't here that in the media, mainstream or otherwise.
Claims today that the global leader of the Anglican Church is out of step with God.
The Primates of the Global Anglican Fellowship (GAFCON), meeting in Kigali Rwanda, have said that Archbishop Justin Welby has,
‘Departed from the authentic exercise of his office by normalising and praising those who have departed from biblical teaching and practice…and giving equal place to practices contrary to biblical norms, as Anglicans have received them. We urge him to repent.’ (link to statement)
And the Archbishop of Canterbury’s explanations are described as disingenuous if not duplicitous.
The Gafcon Primates statement comes on top of the statement from the Global South Fellowship of Anglican Churches, which if anything, is even stronger.
The Global South Fellowship says,
‘Archbishop Welby’s first position is lamentable; his second is repugnant to our understanding of the authority and clarity of Holy Scripture. The notion of ‘pluriform’ truth is contrary to the Anglican Ordinal which binds duly consecrated bishops to be responsible for the guarding, teaching and imparting of divine truth in Holy Scripture.’ (link to statement)
Archbishop Welby’s actions, which have provoked the criticisms, are his appointment of a new Dean of Canterbury (the lead minister of Canterbury Cathedral in the UK) of a man in a civil same sex partnership.
The Global South statement says,
‘It feels as if the present Archbishop of Canterbury has shut the door of the [Canterbury] Cathedral to orthodox bishops, clergy and members of the [Anglican] Communion.’ (link to statement)
We are speaking today with:
Archbishop Foley Beach, from North America, who is the chair of the GAFCON Movement, but who also is aligned with the Global South.
Archbishop James Wong, Primate of Indian Ocean, who is one of the leading figures in the Global South, and who was also at the GAFCON Primates meeting.
UK Bishop Andy Lines, who leads the Anglican Network in Europe, and who was also present at the GAFCON meeting.
We might think what does it matter. It matters because actual Christianity has to go to implement the One World Religion; you know in the same way first century Jewish leaders replaced the laws of Moses with a bastardisation where a Jew committed a crime punishable by excommunication and up to death if they helped a brethren on the Sabbath...that hypocrisy was perfectly demonstrated by Jesus who healed on the Sabbath and was crucified for it.
And just to link it back to the Baha'i Faith, the real religion of the UK Royals. That blue outfit May wore, this is the speech...to the United Nations in NEW YORK.
Delivered on: 20 September 2017 (Transcript of the speech, exactly as it was delivered)
Mr President, Excellencies, ladies and gentlemen, I would like to begin by expressing my sincere condolences to the government and people of Mexico following the devastating earthquake. I also want to reiterate my sympathies to those affected by the recent hurricanes in the Caribbean. Our thoughts are with them all at this time.
As we meet at this General Assembly we face challenges that go right to the heart of who we are as nations. Challenges that test our values, our vision and our resolve to defend the rules and standards that underpin the security and prosperity of our fellow citizens. As I argued in my speech here last year, many of these challenges do not recognise or respect geographical boundaries. I think of course of the terrorism that has struck so many of our countries including my own 5 times this year. And fuelling that terrorist threat the increasing numbers being drawn to extremist ideologies not only in places riven by conflict and instability, but many online in their homes thousands of miles away from those conflicts. I think of the climate change which is depleting and degrading the planet we leave to our children.
And I think of the vast challenges that come from the mass displacement of people. Many are refugees fleeing conflict and persecution. Others, economic migrants, prepared to risk everything on perilous sea crossings in the desperate search for a better life for themselves and their children. Through this migration we also see the challenges of economic inequality between countries and within them. This inequality, together with weaknesses in the global trading system, threatens to undermine support for the forces of liberalism and free trade that have done so much to propel global growth. And it is pushing some countries towards protectionism in the belief that this best defends the interests of their own people.
And as the global system struggles to adapt we are confronted by states deliberately flouting for their own gain the rules and standards that have secured our collective prosperity and security. The unforgiveable use of chemical weapons by the Syrian regime against its own people and perhaps foremost in our minds today the outrageous proliferation of nuclear weapons by North Korea and a threat to use them.
I believe that the only way for us to respond to this vast array of challenges is to come together and defend the international order that we have worked so hard to create and the values by which we stand. For it is the fundamental values that we share, values of fairness, justice and human rights, that have created the common cause between nations to act together in our shared interest and form the multilateral system. And it is this rules-based system which we have developed, including the institutions, the international frameworks of free and fair trade, agreements such as the Paris Climate Accord and laws and conventions like the Non-Proliferation Treaty, which enables the global cooperation through which we can protect those values.
Indeed, the defining purpose of the UN Charter is to maintain international peace and security, to develop friendly relations among nations, to achieve international cooperation in solving problems of an economic, social, cultural or humanitarian character; and to be a centre for harmonising the actions of nations in the attainment of those common ends. And I do not see these as vaunted ideals to be held for their own sake. These values and the rules they imbue are central to our national interest, to our security and prosperity. And the international system with the UN at its heart is the amplifying force that enables countries to cooperate and live up to the standards in word, spirit and deed, to our collective and individual benefit.
If this system we have created is found no longer to be capable of meeting the challenges of our time then there will be a crisis of faith in multilateralism and global cooperation that will damage the interests of all our peoples. So those of us who hold true to our shared values, who hold true to that desire to defend the rules and high standards that have shaped and protected the world we live in, need to strive harder than ever to show that institutions like this United Nations can work for the countries that form them and for the people who we represent.
This means reforming our United Nations and the wider international system so it can prove its worth in helping us to meet the challenges of the 21st Century. And it means ensuring that those who flout the rules and spirit of our international system are held to account, that nations honour their responsibilities and play their part in upholding and renewing a rules-based international order that can deliver prosperity and security for us all.
Reform
First, we must ensure that our multilateral institutions can deliver the aspirations on which they were founded. Think of UNHCR looking after those who’ve been driven out of their homes. The OPCW striving for a world free of chemical weapons. UNICEF helping children in danger. These are all vital missions where the UN surely has a unique role to play. And that is why the UK has over 70 years been such a pioneering supporter of these organisations and more.
But we should also acknowledge that throughout its history the UN has suffered from a seemingly unbridgeable gap between the nobility of its purposes and the effectiveness of its delivery. When the need for multilateral action has never been greater the shortcomings of the UN and its institutions risk undermining the confidence of states as members and donors. Even more importantly they risk the confidence and faith of those who rely upon the blue helmets, who rely upon that sign I stand in front of today coming to their aid in the darkest of hours.
So we must begin by supporting the ambitious reform agenda that Secretary-General Guterres is now leading to create a more agile, transparent and joined-up organisation. Much of this work will be practical and unglamorous. It will require the UN to deliver better cooperation on the ground between agencies, remove competition for funding and improve gender equality. But it will also require real leadership to confront damaging issues that have beset the UN. So I welcome the Secretary-General’s new circle of leadership on preventing sexual exploitation and abuse in UN operations and I’m pleased to be part of this initiative.
We, the nations of the UN, need to give the Secretary-General our backing for these reforms and as an outward-looking global Britain and the second biggest funder of the UN the UK will remain committed to spending 0.7% of GNI on development and humanitarian support. We will use our military to support peacekeeping and our diplomats will continue to work to tackle conflict and support peace building. In turn the UN and its agencies must win our trust in proving to us and to the people we represent that they can deliver. And that is why we will remain generous in our funding but set aside 30% to be paid only to those parts of the UN that achieve sufficient results.
But this is about more than technical reforms, important as they are. It is also about reforms that enable the United Nations to truly respond to the global challenges of the 21st century. At last year’s General Assembly we undertook to do far more to resolve the challenges of refugee and migration flows. We agreed to develop global compacts to address the causes and the consequences of the mass movements of people we see today. This was an important step to elevate significantly our global response and enable us collectively to tackle this challenge of our times.
So in the year ahead as well as agreeing the principles of these compacts we must ensure they can be applied in practice. We must do more to identify, protect and support refugees and those hosting them near conflicts. And on migration our starting point must be that it can benefit both countries and migrants themselves but only when it is safe, orderly, well-managed and legal. If we do not manage this effectively, we will fail both our own citizens and those taking these dangerous journeys. And we will push more people into the curse of modern slavery and the hands of the human traffickers and organised criminal groups that drive this inhuman industry.
But the steps we are agreeing through these compacts alone will not be enough. For if people cannot find jobs, opportunity and hope for themselves and their families where they live they will continue to look elsewhere. And so as the United Nations and as members, we must work harder to combine the efforts of our development programmes with the private sector and the international financial institutions. To support the creation of jobs and livelihoods that will address not just the consequences, but the causes of this great challenge of our time. For the truth is that despite our best efforts, we are not succeeding. We must do more.
The same is true with terrorism, where again the challenges we face today are vastly different from those of previous eras. When terrorists struck London and Manchester this year, the world saw our cities come together in defiance. Our parliament carries on. Ariana Grande came back to Manchester and sang again. London Bridge is bustling with people. Our communities came together at the Finsbury Park mosque in North London. And Londoners got back on the Tube. The terrorists did not win, for we will never let anyone destroy our way of life.
But defiance alone is not enough. As leaders, we have all visited too many hospitals, and seen too many innocent people murdered in our countries. In the last decade, hundreds of thousands have been killed by terrorists across the world. This is a truly global tragedy that is increasingly touching the lives of us all. This year is the tenth anniversary of the death of the woman who introduced me to my husband, and who was known well to many of us in this United Nations. Benazir Bhutto was brutally murdered by people who actively rejected the values that all of us here in this United Nations stand for. In a country that has suffered more than most at the hands of terrorists. Murdered for standing up for democracy, murdered for espousing tolerance, and murdered for being a woman.
When I think of the hundreds of thousands of victims of terrorism in countries across the world, I think of their friends, their families, their communities, devastated by this evil, and I say enough is enough. So of course, we must continue to take the fight to these terrorist groups on the battlefield. And the UK will remain at the forefront of this effort, while also helping to build the capabilities of our alliances and our partners to better take on this challenge. And we must also step up our efforts as never before to tackle the terrorist use of the internet. For as the threat from terrorists evolves, so must our cooperation. And that is why today, for the first time in the UN, governments and industry through the Global Internet Forum for Counterterrorism will be coming together to do just that.
The tech companies have made significant progress on this issue, but we need to go further and faster to reduce the time it takes to reduce terrorist content online, and to increase significantly their efforts to stop it being uploaded in the first place. This is a major step in reclaiming the internet from those who would use it to do us harm. But ultimately, it is not just the terrorists themselves who we need to defeat, it is the extremist ideologies that fuel them. It is the ideologies that preach hatred, so division and undermine our common humanity. We must be far more robust in identifying these ideologies and defeating them across all parts of our societies.
As I said in the aftermath of the attack on London Bridge this summer, we have to face the fact that this will require some difficult conversations. We all need to come together, to take on this extremism that lives among us, and to nurture the common values that must ultimately win out. These are the values of this United Nations. And yet, despite our best efforts, we as nations and as a United Nations have not found the ways or the means to truly take on this threat. And that is why today, as I talk about UN reform, I ask the Secretary General to make this fight against terrorists and the ideologies that drive them a core part of his agenda, at the heart of our development, peace building, and conflict prevention work. And to give this effort the prominence it surely requires. I’m calling on the Secretary General to make this a theme of next year’s General Assembly and use this to harness the efforts of governments, the private sector, and civil society so that we can truly strike the generational blow against this vile evil in our world.
And as we do so, we must clearly strike the balance between protecting our people and protecting their freedoms. And we must always guard against those who would use the fight against terrorism as a cover for oppression and the violation of human rights. So as we look at the situation in Northern Burma, I call on the Burmese authorities to put an end to the violence, allow humanitarian access, and fully implement Annan Commission recommendations.
Responsibilities
And so by reforming our multinational institutions, we can strengthen their ability to deliver for the people we serve, protect the vulnerable and fight injustice. We can enable multilateralism to multiply the effect of our individual commitments through its convening power and spending power. Through the economies of scale it can bring, the standards it can set, the moral leadership it can harness, and the legitimacy it can confer. But multilateralism can only reflect the values that individual states project, and can only multiply the commitments that they are prepared to make. It is strong nations that form strong institutions, and which provide the basis of the international partnerships and cooperation that brings stability to our world.
And so it falls to us all to decide whether we will honour the responsibilities that we have to one another. I’ve talked about the role of the UN in stepping up on counterterrorism. But this is an area that we as states have critical responsibilities, which the UN cannot itself address alone, for it is inescapable that the terrorism conflict and the instability that we see across the world is in many cases driven by the actions of states acting through proxies.
So when countries back groups like Hezbollah to increase instability and conflict across the Middle East, support so-called separatists in Ukraine to create instability on Europe’s eastern borders, or give tacit support to criminal groups launching cyber-attacks against our countries and institutions, they call into question the very rules and international systems that protect us. And that is why, both globally, but also in our own continent of Europe, the UK will remain steadfast in our commitment and responsibility to ensure the security and stability of our friends and allies as we have done for generations.
And just as it the responsibility of nations not to seek to advance their interests through terrorist or proxy groups, so it is also the responsibility of each of is to act together in the face of the most egregious violations of our common rules and standards. Clearly responsibility for the chaos and tragedy that we see in Syria lies firmly at the door of Asaad. He and his backers have continually frustrated the efforts of the UN to act as the broker of peace through the Geneva Process. As responsible states, we must not abandon our support for the UN’s attempts to secure peace and stability in Syria. And indeed, we must continue to call on all those with influence on the regime to bring them to the table.
But in recent weeks, the UN has also confirmed what we all new, namely that the Syrian regime has used chemical weapons on its own people. In the face of that, we have a responsibility to stand up, to hold the Syrian regime to account. This responsibility sits with us all, but a particular special responsibility lies on the shoulders of the permanent members of the security council. And as one of these five members, the United Kingdom takes our special responsibility seriously.
So I am proud that we have used the full weight of our diplomacy to ensure that we have not had to exercise our veto in a generation. Seeking to foster international cooperation, not frustrated. But others have not done so. One country in particular has used its veto as many times in the last five years as in the whole of the second half of the Cold War. And in so doing, they have prevented action against a despicable regime that has murdered its own people with chemical weapons. As a result, in Syria, the United Nations has been blocked. This has undermined the values that we hold dear, and the international rules based system that is the basis of security and prosperity around the world.
Now we face an even more immediate, global danger in the activities of Kim Jong Un and his regime in DPRK. Time after time he’s shown contempt for the international community of law-abiding states. Contempt for his neighbours and contempt for the institutions and rules that have preserved peace and security. On this challenge, the UN in recent weeks has shown it can step up to the task. With last Monday’s security council resolution creating the biggest sanctions package of the 21st Century. We have seen regional and global powers coming together and as in its founding charter putting aside limited self-interests to show leadership on behalf of the wider world. But despite these efforts, DPRK continues to defy and provoke the international community and threaten its neighbours. And unless all security council members continue to live up to the special responsibilities that are placed upon us, and in seeking to resolve this crisis, be prepared to take on necessary measures to tackle this threat, we will not be able to bring stability to the Korean Peninsula.
So as the world looks on, I am calling for further steps and for nations with this special responsibility to work together and exert the pressure we know is necessary to force Kim Jong Un to change his ways. Let us not fail this time. Let our message to North Korea be clear. Our determination to uphold these rules is stronger by far than their determination to undermine them.
Mr. President, throughout the history of this United Nations, countries have shown time and time again that by being true to our values, rules, and standards, it is possible to come together and to deliver in ways that have the most extraordinary impact on the lives of the people we serve. I believe we can do so again. We must do so again, and we will do so again. Thank you.
TERRORISMS. Do you think if the Richard Hall case regarding the Ariana Grande Manchester Arena bomb goes to a British court he has any chance of winning given the high profile actors who have used it for their despicable chess play?
Just to finish this off, Theresa May announced her resignation as Prime Minister on 24 May 2019, her official last day being the 7th June... So, the end of May being June, and a SIX & SEVEN. She wore red as opposed to blue...PURPLE. I guess she was always going to be out the door before COVID-19; we saw the same with Benjamin Netanyahu...he was switched out with Naftali Bennett, Number 13, when bribing people with doughnuts was converted to imposing a GREEN PASS to leave the house, but Bibi soon returned to office once that was withdrawn.
TERRORISMS. Do you think if the Richard Hall case regarding the Ariana Grande Manchester Arena bomb goes to a British court he has any chance of winning given the high profile actors who have used it for their despicable chess play?
no sweetheart i don't think any battle will be won playing their way
my way maybe ,ridicule what 911 is meant to be and show it for its brilliance toys n all
I thought I would remind myself where this thread was going. I was looking at THE LOVE POLICE, before tailing off into charity scandals and UNICEF. So back to Charlie. If we remember, we were introduced to him as a "city worker"...which was later finessed into "financial adviser in the City", well I'd never really thought about it, but I posted an old episode of Richard D Hall when he broadcast on television, I think it was one of the cable channels. He interviews Mark Cocking, who was introduced to us as, you guessed it, an ex City of London banker. I'm thinking it's one of those fake ins for character creation.
Anyway, Charlie tells us his Love Police film was funded by the German government...no let's be clear...no government has money, except from the money it steals from people in the forms of taxes by lying to them.
rachel wrote: ↑Tue Oct 10, 2023 9:50 pm
In this video Charlie tells us he no longer thinks 911 was an inside job...I'll return to this in a later post. But this is where I find out Charlie did a double-act with Danny Shine for around 11 months, though in another video referenced, Danny says it was only a couple of months. Anyway, Charlie tells us in the above video, "I met Danny on May 1st 2009...London G20 stuff going on...he had a sign saying 'Everything is OK', I have a megaphone making false public statements...there was a fusion."
So we have Danny and Charlie as a team for a bit. What I find noteworthy is at the 8 minute mark, Charlie then goes on to tell us the partnership produced, the 'Love Police Official Movie', which I guess was a documentary of them megaphoning at a Occupy movement type protest; but interestingly, he states the German government funded it...that would be Angela Merkel's government.
So the guy who was banging on about governments stealing money from citizens in the form of taxes is quite happy to be paid by the exact same system of theft? This is a link to the German film page.
52min or 95min original English version with German subtitles and voice-over available
SYNOPSIS
We all wonder about politicians’ statements, managers’ salaries and social injustice. But there are people amongst us who can no longer wonder in silence. People who urge us, to question ourselves and the system we live in. Like Charlie Veitch and his Love Police.
Charles Veitch worked as a financial adviser in London’s City for seven years. In 2009 he was fired. Instead of finding a new job, he bought a megaphone. And with the help of his friend Danny Shine he set up a group called The Love Police. They went to public places to annoy people – officious police officers and security guards mostly. They hugged passers-by and held up signs saying ‘Everything is Okay’ and challenged people to question their attitudes to work, money and authority. They filmed these events and posted them on Youtube and they became popular. And the bigger Love Police grew, the more radical Veitch became. He was a witness to the death of Ian Tomlinson during the 2009 G 20 summit, called for “chaos” in London, took part in the Occupy movement, was arrested in Toronto, Edinburgh and London, and invited to festivals around the world. He was also a conspiracy theorist and 9/11 truther. But when he rather dramatically turned away from the 9/11 conspiracy movement, the threats began. The music for the film was composed by the Stereo MCs, also based in London.
CAST AND CREW
Director Harold Baer
Screenwriter Charles Veitch, Harold Baer
Editor Lana Kloodt
I've been sitting on this part since the start of this thread. But just having a look over source videos, yep, it's a goer, and it's one of those discoveries that makes one totally reassess how they think the world works. So, just a few recaps from the thread.
Firstly, it's quite possible that people on this site know Charles Veitch better than I do. I just happened across his videos during the COVID lockdowns. I knew nothing about his back story, it was only when I was looking up Danny Shine was I reintroduced to Charlie, and while flicking through THE FALSE ENLIGHTENMENT OF DANNY SHINE, I learned of their prior connection. Now it might be that there was a genuine breaking up, it's hard to tell with actors. Is it real or just the script?
And we do have positive proof they are both actors. First Charlie...
Next Danny... I've queued up the part of the video with his admission. There is a voice in the background that says, "you're not recording, do you realise that..."
Voice:"Listen, I thought you were here as a psychologist yesterday or the day before...
Danny:"Yes...I...
Voice:...are you still a psychologist?
Danny:"...I do, I...
Voice:...or do you morph into different kinds of...
Danny:"I play different characters..."
Orange top:"I think he's paid by Shall-Hatch (??)
Voice:"Do you?...Oh, okay."
Danny:"Yeah, yeah...I'm...I'm acting."
So both people are actors, and we are asked to believe they "randomly" met at a G20 protest, outside where the Leaders' Summit was taking place in London in 2009, just after the big "financial crash".
rachel wrote: ↑Sun Oct 15, 2023 3:09 pm
G20 leaders began gathering in London on 1 April 2009. Before leaving for the London Summit, French President Nicolas Sarkozy suggested that if a meaningful deal was not agreed France would walk out of the summit echoing the "empty chair" gesture of then-French President Charles de Gaulle in 1965. At a joint press conference in London, Brown and Obama said that suggestions of a rift were exaggerated. Sarkozy attended a separate press conference with Merkel in which both repeated calls for the summit to agree on more stringent regulation of financial markets and restated their firm opposition to further financial stimulus packages.
On the evening of 1 April the leaders attended a reception at Buckingham Palace hosted by Elizabeth II. During a photograph she lightly rebuked the Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi for shouting too loudly in an effort to attract the attention of United States President Barack Obama. The story was featured heavily in the Italian media, and was used by opponents to lambast Berlusconi. After the palace reception, the leaders dined at 10 Downing Street where the food was cooked by Jamie Oliver.
The summit proper began on the morning of 2 April and took place at the Excel Centre in Custom House, east London.
A working dinner at the summit – Left to right: Merkel, Obama, Lee, Abdullah, Lula da Silva
The protest also spawning the death of Ian Tomlinson, of which (actor) Charles Veitch was an apparent eyewitness; though there doesn't seem to be any video of Charlie being in the vicinity at the time Tomlinson was caught on film. This being one of the last frames of the video just before he allegedly collapse and died...because clearly the guy filming this looking for a news story, isn't going to turn the camera in the other direction to film the ensuing commotion described by Charlie in his witness testimony, telling of protesters clashing with police as Tomlinson dies.
And then we were invited to believe the following plastic mask was Ian Tomlinson, by George Monbiot, oh sorry, that would be Simon Israel. See how part of the neck skin is outside of the blue neck hoop of his top. How does that work exactly?
And then we got to find out a little more about Danny and Charlie's relationship, and their apparent parting of company.
rachel wrote: ↑Wed Oct 11, 2023 10:54 am
Back to the False Enlightenment video, Charlie is still a little confused and upset about why Danny decided to end their double-act, and more than that, Danny, as we will see in another video, totally distances himself from Charlie. Again, this is not about personal relationships, I'm more interested in business relationships, and if you happen to stumble upon this, Charlie, I don't think it was anything personal.
So, this is the statement video mentioned, I haven't actually watched more than a couple of words, I include it more for completeness, and to show Charlie isn't making it up. The video was made 8 September 2009, the current PM was Gordon Brown, Tony Blair leaving office on 27 June 2007. Now I notice, Charlie says he met Danny on May 1st, 2009, and the breakup video was September 8th of the same year. That's not 11 months, Charlie, that's three months, and in line with the time span Danny claims in another video.
DANNY RESPONDS TO "MESSAGE TO THE RESISTANCE"
Yet could it be that the 11 months is a factual statement by Charlie and it relates to something? If we think these to people are not organic arseholes who just happened to meet on the streets of London at a totally spontaneous G20 protest. That they didn't just hit it off and gel and do some megaphone rap, but rather there was some sort of tendering, bids, job interviews, contracts, signing off of what was to be performed, and rehearsals.
While Danny ends his LOVE POLICE involvement, Charlie heads for Toronto, and the following year's G20 Summit to be held on Thursday, June 24th, 2010.
rachel wrote: ↑Fri Oct 27, 2023 9:09 pmCHARLIE: It's funny; we're still one day away from the actual event and it's already massively locked down.
DANNY: Yeah, massive is an understatement. This is a completely unprecedented amount of police. I've never seen anything like it.
CHARLIE: Alright, well, thanks. We'll see you in jail.
Original Video filmed by Danny Canadian Mainstream News Report
I bring up the Canadian section because there is an interesting piece of information in Charlie's acting resume.
Charlie, who we assume is Scottish, can also speak with a Canadian accent. And guess what, he's in Canada at the G20 summit in 2010. At this point in time he's still a fully fledged 911 TRUTHER, but the question I'm interested in, did he learn his Canadian accent on his own? Or maybe he was with a number of other actors who were also trained to speak with Canadian accents at the same time, so they could perform in an event in, say, Canada...maybe more specifically, Toronto.
I think I've now connected enough of the background information to show where I'm heading. I could put the next bit here, but I think I'll do it in the next post as I've got to find a video.
Okay, so we are in Canada, and a reminder, Canada is coincidently one of the strongholds of the Baha'i Faith in the West.
rachel wrote: ↑Wed Jun 15, 2022 10:35 pm
The Shrine of the Báb is a structure on the slopes of Mount Carmel in Haifa, Israel, where the remains of the Báb, founder of the Bábí Faith and forerunner of Baháʼu'lláh in the Baháʼí Faith, are buried; it is considered to be the second holiest place on Earth for Baháʼís, after the Shrine of Baháʼu'lláh in Acre. Its precise location on Mount Carmel was designated by Baháʼu'lláh himself to his eldest son, ʻAbdu'l-Bahá, in 1891. ʻAbdu'l-Bahá planned the structure, which was designed and completed several years later by his grandson, Shoghi Effendi.
Interestingly finding an old picture I see this caption.
Architectural drawing of the superstructure of the Shrine of the Báb, by William Sutherland Maxwell
Design for a superstructure
‘Abdu’l-Bahá had intended that a more elaborate superstructure would eventually be constructed for the Shrine of the Báb. In 1942, Shoghi Effendi asked the distinguished Canadian architect William Sutherland Maxwell to begin work on its design, and the final form was approved in 1944.
Shoghi Effendi asks his father-in-law, William Maxwell, to design the Shrine.
Drone video of the Bahai Gardens in Haifa
So I wanted to introduce this video of former Governor of the Bank of Canada, Mark Carney. Let's first find out a little bit of his background history from Wiki.
Goldman Sachs
Carney spent 13 years at Goldman Sachs and worked in their Boston, London, New York City, Tokyo, and Toronto offices. His progressively more senior positions included: co-head of sovereign risk; executive director, emerging debt capital markets; and managing director, investment banking. He worked on South Africa's post-apartheid venture into international bond markets, and was involved in Goldman's work with the 1998 Russian financial crisis.
In 2003, Carney left Goldman Sachs to join the Bank of Canada as a deputy governor. One year later, he was recruited to join the Department of Finance Canada as senior associate deputy minister, beginning that role on November 15, 2004.
Department of Finance
From November 2004 to October 2007, Carney was the senior associate deputy minister and G7 deputy in the Canadian Finance Department. He served under two finance ministers: Ralph Goodale, a Liberal and Jim Flaherty, a Conservative. During this time Carney oversaw the Government of Canada's controversial plan to tax income trusts at source. Carney was also the lead on the federal government's profitable sale of its 19 percent stake in Petro-Canada.
Governor of the Bank of Canada
In November 2007, it was announced that Carney would be appointed Governor of the Bank of Canada. He immediately left his position at the Department of Finance to serve as an advisor to the outgoing governor, David Dodge, before formally assuming Dodge's position on February 1, 2008. Carney was selected over Paul Jenkins, the senior deputy governor, who had been considered the front-runner to succeed Dodge.
Carney took on this role at the beginning of the 2007 global financial crisis. At the time of his appointment, Carney was the youngest central bank governor among the G8 and G20.
Financial crisis
Carney's actions as Governor of the Bank of Canada are said to have played a major role in helping Canada avoid the worst impacts of the financial crisis.
The epoch-making feature of his tenure as Governor remains the decision to cut the overnight rate by 50 basis points in March 2008, only one month after his appointment. While the European Central Bank delivered a rate increase in July 2008, Carney anticipated the leveraged-loan crisis would trigger global contagion. When policy rates in Canada hit the effective lower-bound, the central bank combatted the crisis with the non-standard monetary tool "conditional commitment" in April 2009 to hold the policy rate for at least one year, in a boost to domestic credit conditions and market confidence. Output and employment began to recover from mid-2009, in part thanks to monetary stimulus. The Canadian economy outperformed those of its G7 peers during the crisis, and Canada was the first G7 nation to have both its Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and employment recover to pre-crisis levels.
The Bank of Canada's decision to provide substantial additional liquidity to the Canadian financial system, and its unusual step of announcing a commitment to keep interest rates at their lowest possible level for one year, appear to have been significant contributors to Canada's weathering of the crisis.
Canada's risk-averse fiscal and regulatory environment is also cited as a factor. In 2009 a Newsweek columnist wrote, "Canada has done more than survive this financial crisis. The country is positively thriving in it. Canadian banks are well capitalized and poised to take advantage of opportunities that American and European banks cannot seize."
Carney earned various accolades for his leadership during the financial crisis: he was named one of Financial Times's "Fifty who will frame the way forward", and of Time Magazine's 2010 Time 100. In May 2011, Reader's Digest named him "Editor's Choice for Most Trusted Canadian".
In October 2012, Carney was named "Central Bank Governor of the Year 2012" by the editors of Euromoney magazine.
Of note, Carney used to work for Goldman Sachs...for a whole 13 years. ...You never guess where Sajid Javid used to work before becoming a Member of Parliament; then Chancellor of the Exchequer; then the drug pusher...oh sorry, I mean the Secretary of State for Health responsible for the mandating of the COVID-19 vaccines for Care Home workers, and later NHS staff...that was later repealed because of the shear amount of workers he would have had to sack from the NHS to enforce the Parliamentary criminality. ...Yes, only Goldman Sachs...and also the hole he's going to disappear back down again after the next General Election.
But back to Carney, he appears to be a bit of a hero according to MSM. That's a little bit different than what we hear in this video. Now I don't know this guy, and I wouldn't trust his as far as I could throw him, but you can tell the way he smiles, he knows a fair bit more than he's saying in words. And with a big smile at 1:11, he tells us he worked with Carney for a while.
Mark Carney Might Be The Biggest Financial Loser - 11 Feb 2022
So at 3:38, he tells us Carney took over the presidency of the BIS, the Bank for International Settlement...a Swiss Central Bank set up after WWI...the Central Bank of Central Banks. Then of course, he becomes the Governor of the Bank of England. He is responsible for BASEL III accord, basically a system to make sure the banking system dose not collapse, then the GREEN DEATH, COPA 26, a environmental agreement via the UN, then Brookfield Asset Management, that's all to do with GREEN energy.
ESG Investments, involving all the private sector investments, central banks and large institutions. A total of 130 Trillion investments (any coincidence the 13 in that number?).
And then at 8:19, he talks about an article Mark Carney apparently wrote in the Canadian Globe and Mail called "Follow the Money"...I've found the link, but not from the Globe and Mail site, which looks to have deleted the piece; but off this Reddit post. He's saying, "that the people protesting in Ottawa, we should look into their accounts and seize their money and stop them from having money because they are breaking the law". In fact here's the article in full.
It’s time to end the ‘freedom convoy’ in Ottawa by enforcing the law and following the money
MARK CARNEY
CONTRIBUTED TO THE GLOBE AND MAIL
PUBLISHED: FEBRUARY 7TH, 2022
Police watch over as truckers and their supporters continue to protest against the COVID-19 vaccine mandates, in Ottawa, on Feb. 6.
Mark Carney is an Ottawa resident and former governor of the Bank of Canada and the Bank of England.
In our capital city, many people have been terrorized for more than a week. Women fleeing abuse have been harassed. Many elderly have been too afraid to venture outside their homes for groceries. Families have been deprived of sleep for days on end by the constant barrage of 100 decibel noise. Control over the city’s downtown core, which includes the Parliamentary Precinct, was ceded by the police and taken over by what the chair of the Police Services Board describes as an “insurrection.”
Canadians can be forgiven if they thought this would never happen in Ottawa.
The goals of the leadership of the so-called freedom convoy were clear from the start: to remove from power the government that Canadians elected less than six months ago. Their blatant treachery was dismissed as comic, which meant many didn’t take them as seriously as they should have. Certainly not our public safety authorities, whose negotiations facilitated the convoy’s entry into the heart of our capital and have watched as its dangerous infrastructure has been steadily reinforced – a policy of engagement that has amounted to a reality of appeasement.
On the first weekend, many Canadians who joined the demonstrations undoubtedly had peaceful objectives. Tired as we all are with unprecedented disruptions that we’ve all endured over the past two years, it’s understandable that many would want to come to Ottawa to protest. It’s a free country, and everyone should be able to express their opinions free of interference from the state, just as the press should be able to report without fear of harassment or intimidation.
But now in its second week, no one should have any doubt. This is sedition. That’s a word I never thought I’d use in Canada. It means “incitement of resistance to or insurrection against lawful authority.”
From now on, those who are occupying the downtown of our nation’s capital should be in no doubt. They are no longer simply advocating a different strategy to end COVID-19. They are not patriots. This is not about “restoring freedom” but beginning anarchy. This isn’t getting carried away at a rally. It’s not a rush of blood to the head. It’s deliberate and calculated, and because of that, they must know that from now on, there will be consequences for their actions.
The police had been reluctant to enforce the most basic bylaws. But these “infractions” – the constant blaring of horns at all hours, the harassment of people, the culture of fear – have been making residents’ lives hell, will bankrupt our businesses and if left unchecked would help achieve the convoy’s goal of undermining our democracy and the rule of law.
Those who are still helping to extend this occupation must be identified and punished to the full force of the law.
Drawing the line means choking off the money that financed this occupation. Again, many Canadians who were amongst the initial donors were likely well meaning. Perhaps they were unaware of the convoy’s stated objectives, or – like many in positions of authority in Ottawa – they didn’t take them seriously. Perhaps all they wanted was a new COVID-19 policy with fewer restrictions.
But by now anyone sending money to the convoy should be in no doubt: You are funding sedition. Foreign funders of an insurrection interfered in our domestic affairs from the start. Canadian authorities should take every step within the law to identify and thoroughly punish them. The involvement of foreign governments and any officials connected to them should be identified, exposed, and addressed.
I know from experience that crises don’t end by themselves. You can’t spin your way out of failure. You must recognize the scale of the challenge, devise a clear plan and then implement it methodically and deliberately. Your determination to do so can never be in doubt. Then and only then can order be restored. In this case, that means enforcing the law and following the money. Individuals must be held responsible for their lawlessness and those who financed their actions must be dissuaded from ever doing so again.
Our Constitution begins with peace, order and good government. We must live up to this founding principle in order to protect all our freedoms.
Consider what the thread is about. Consider what I discovered about the 2010 G20 Summit protest; what Charlie Veitch, an apparent unemployed Brit, was doing in Toronto in the first place, and the way he directed part of the protest. Then how he and Danny Dicks disappear from the footage before the violence is captured. And then compare it to this 2022 article written by Mark Carney apparently extremely hot under the collar about Canadian protesters, using words such as "insurrection" and "sedition", when we who watched the livestreams know the protest was good natured. He wanted people donating to have their bank accounts frozen and them prosecuted. Do you see the matched in the narratives? And now the Globe and Mail has deleted the article, clearly trying to disappear it down the memory hole.
At 9:19, this guy goes through Carney's resume a second time with "a reality filter" on. From his book. "Markets and the tension in markets was an old form of consensus. He unveiled a new form of consensus, so all our decisions can be made according to his matrix. The values will drive individuals, businesses and governments to make better decisions. Consensus is...solidarity, it's fairness, it's responsibility, resilience, sustainability, dynamism, humility, all of these elements are going to be the things we use to measure markets. to measure energy, and to allocate the 130 trillion dollars that have been given to his nebulise order."
At 16:15, this chap gets on to what I think is the most interesting point. Mark Carney and his makeup. The fact he bumped into Carney on the street and he still had his makeup on...particularly the little smile when he mentions his eyebrows. I'm thinking...
His last point..."We think about the simulation, we think about 'Clown World'. The simulation delivers just beautiful things to us. Isn't it amazing..." I don't think it is amazing, I think it is designed "...that the guy who runs the clown world is actually named Carney...he's a Carney. A carney runs clown world, and might be the guy responsible for, the poster child for the end of clown world..."
I don't think I even need to go into the feature comparison, if we just look at the way actor Danny Shine holds his body compared to THE CARNEY, we have a match. Look at the slope of the shoulders, the way one is higher than the other. Look at the natural tilt of the head, the way both guys lean. It's the exact same angle
What's the chances of having two different guys being dopplegangers, holding their postures in exactly the same way, and then being obsessed with the exact same thing, but apparently from two different angles?
I think this is one of the biggest card hand reveals we've seen so far. The Governor of the Bank of England was an actual CARNEY.
Why not Welcome Extinction? Conversation with Co founder of Extinction Rebellion Roger Hallam...and Danny Shine - 30 May 2019
All part of the CARNEY SHOW. ...And remember this, if you wanted that question answering.
