Saturday 17 June 2017

Jeremy's New World Order

Hope and Change? Or was that some other political puppet?

Extract from Jeremy's pre-election speech at Chatham House:

"I am often asked if as prime minister I would order the use of nuclear weapons. It’s an extraordinary question when you think about it – would you order the indiscriminate killing of millions of people? Would you risk such extensive contamination of the planet that no life could exist across large parts of the world? If circumstances arose where that was a real option, it would represent complete and cataclysmic failure. It would mean world leaders had already triggered a spiral of catastrophe for humankind.

Labour is committed actively to pursue disarmament under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and we are committed to no first use of nuclear weapons. But let me make this absolutely clear. If elected prime minister, I will do everything necessary to protect the safety and security of our people and our country. That would be my first duty." Bold is my emphasis.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8rhMKu9F9xw

The full text of Jeremy's speech at Chatham House is in the notes underneath the vid. You should watch the vid first, it is quite short.

In case you are not aware then, Chatham House is the public face of the Royal Institute for International Affairs. [It's sister in the US is the Council on Foreign Relations]. Both of these "think tanks" are important parts of the current "Western" power structure. ie. the Anglo/US/Zionist apparatus that subverts democracy on behalf of the oligarchs who rule over us.

The origins of both the RIIA, and the CFR, were within the Rhodes/Milner group of the start of the 20th C. You know, those "British" guys who were instrumental in arranging WW1. British my arse, they were international monopoly capitalists. The RIIA and CFR were both formed in the early 1920's in preparation for Act 2.

Jeremy must surely know all of this. But his fealty to them is essential if he is to be allowed by them to become PM. It's the oligarchical brown nosing equivalent to joining the Queens Privy Council.

The QPC is another, democracy subverting, UK Establishment cabal made up of politicians from both major parties, judges and other bigwigs. It's affairs are totally secret, which all members take a solemn oath to maintain, so there are no public minutes. It is chaired by the Queen herself and all members must also swear an oath to their fealty to the Queen as well. An oath which places their loyalty to her above their loyalty to the British people. The same British people who "elected" all those politicians to "represent" them. So much for democracy then.

Apologists for the QPC will tell you that it is purely ceremonial, that it's meetings are inconsequential and insignificant. If you believe that then you will believe that I played center forward for Everton when we won the league in 1970. And that I scored 45 goals that season including 7 hat-tricks! Do I really need to spell it out? If the QPC is so inconsequential then why are its affairs totally secret?

Jeremy had already joined the QPC when he made his Chatham House speech. In his first week as Labour leader in fact.

Of course all politicians want to have their cake and eat it don't they. But us plebs are not obliged to accept that are we. So we shouldn't let them get away with that. It is quite simply really:

Either the senior pols that are putting themselves forward for holding power really will have the ability to make the changes that they claim that they will.

Or they are beholden to a hidden power structure, the oligarchs and their Doge, her majesty.

Jeremy's knowtowing to them is a very good indicator which it is.

I expect that the blinkered die-hard Corbynites will ignore all this, that their old fashioned tribal politics will trump their principles as usual.

Final thoughts:

It is widely known that the US now has "boots on the ground", in al-Tanf, in southern Syria; they have set up a base there it seems. So they have invaded a sovereign country without any UN sanction, quelle surprise. And, given that it is widely assumed that the UK also has troops there, or just over the border in Jordan, ready to join the action, is it not incumbent upon Her Majesties Opposition to actually oppose and ask questions in Parliament? But we don't hear a peep do we? Nothing from the "opposition" and nothing from the mainstream media.

The subject is off limits it appears. Almost certainly because the invasion is illegal and so the Deep State oligarchs have decreed a blanket silence. Chatham House, Queens Privy Council, or some other anti democratic decision making body? We will never know because it is all done in secret.

Update 3rd August 2017

The al-Tanf invasion was a failure.

Quoting The Saker:

"The best illustration of this reality is the latest American debacle in the al-Tanf region near the Jordanian border. The Americans, backed by the Jordanians, quietly invaded this mostly empty part of the Syrian desert with the hope of cutting off the lines of communications between the Syrians and the Iraqis. Instead, what happened was that the Syrians cut the Americans off and reached the border first, thereby making the American presence simply useless (see here and here for details). It appears that the Americans have now given up, at least temporarily, on al-Tanf, and that US forces will be withdrawn and redeployed elsewhere in Syria."

No mention of the Brits. Maybe they saw the lie of the land and stayed away. My point in the main blog is no less valid now that the invasion failed.

See this link. The quotation is the last para under the section headed "Good terrorists, aka “FSA”, Syria 2017" :
http://thesaker.is/the-end-of-the-wars-on-the-cheap-for-the-united-states/


Update 4th September 2017

Seems that the Brits were in al-Tanf after all:

https://www.almasdarnews.com/article/british-troops-withdraw-south-syria-end-training-militants/

No comments:

Post a Comment