Post: #1

New UK Law Could Criminalize Anti-Feminism and Anti-Immigration Opinions

Quote:For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens: as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone. It's often meant we have stood neutral between different values. And thats helped foster a narrative of extremism and grievance. This government will conclusively turn the page on that failed approach.

In defense of David Cameron, why shouldn't he end freedom of speech in Britain, he won the election, and it's not like he has to worry about the citizens having guns to defend their rights anymore.

On a serious note, another bullet point that shows "Conservatives" to be just as feminist as their opponents.

Post: #2

If this is true, then anyone who refuses to believe that feminism and globalism are not aspects of the state religion is sadly deluded.

Post: #3

(05-14-2015 12:03 AM)N°6 Wrote:  If this is true, then anyone who refuses to believe that feminism and globalism are not aspects of the state religion is sadly deluded.

Russia is the only country to offer true resistance to the Borg

Post: #4

This is speculation only, but for what its worth I believe David Cameron is whipped by his wife. Thus allowing him to fall under the influence of feminine political thoughts. I.E. totalitarianism.

A majority of the time when you see a photo or news footage of him, his wife is holding his hand in the dominant position and leading him like he's a little five year old boy. Next thing you know she'll be leading him by his little pinky finger as he holds his bottle and teddy bear. I see this, I see weakness.

It's the little observations like this that I believe can be quite revealing about the true nature of what lies behind the mask of political leaders. I could be wrong about Mr. Prime Minister. I'm not even British.

Case in point. Even emasculating him on camera like its hardy har funny saying she has to be firm with him. Keep that shit in the house. If your wife can't publicly respect you, how can your people?

If you can't command your wife, you're not fit to command a nation.

Post: #5

And so it goes. 'Democracy brings peace' they said. 'Democracy creates freedom' they said. 'It's a conservative party' they said.

Post: #6

(05-14-2015 01:29 AM)NomadofEU Wrote:  

(05-14-2015 12:03 AM)N°6 Wrote:  If this is true, then anyone who refuses to believe that feminism and globalism are not aspects of the state religion is sadly deluded.

Russia is the only country to offer true resistance to the Borg

Without the fake left-right and East-West dichotomy we would realize a lot faster how enslaved we already are.

https://realcurrencies.wordpress.com/201...n-worship/

Post: #7

Lol Zelcorpion Those are Vietnamese silk gowns: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...tfits.html

Great catch Spectrumwalker - a man who lets his wife lead him like that deserves great suspicion, let alone a prime minister.

Post: #8

(05-14-2015 07:55 AM)Basil Ransom Wrote:  Lol Zelcorpion Those are Vietnamese silk gowns: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...tfits.html

Great catch Spectrumwalker - a man who lets his wife lead him like that deserves great suspicion, let alone a prime minister.

The garbs are not what makes them freemasons - besides most high level guys don't even have to join them.

When I am a fucktard then so is Antony Sutton (history professor of Stanford) and Carroll Quigley (historian of the CFR). Antony Sutton's books were never discredited and he clearly showed that the communist regimes were always supported from the high powers from the west - only to make it last even as long as that.

I don't agree with the text above to the pic of those politicians - that was more dramatization and reminded more of the Simpsons stonecutters than anything serious.

You don't have to join any such "orders|" to cooperate at the top. No reason to call me names here. I am sure that CNN will explain the entire political spectrum in great detail to you - much better than the books of guys high above who somehow had a different opinion on the real reasons behind the visible power moves. I don't know any mental taboos and don't just shut off whenever someone mentions ANYTHING contrary to what CNBC is preaching and the president PR figure is spouting on TV.

Post: #9

(05-14-2015 02:17 AM)Spectrumwalker Wrote:  This is speculation only, but for what its worth I believe David Cameron is whipped by his wife. Thus allowing him to fall under the influence of feminine political thoughts. I.E. totalitarianism.

She is descended from sugar plantation slave owners which received compensation for the Act of Parliament in 1833 which abolished slavery. She's of no common stock.

Post: #10

A danger of the Red Pill: you might become so paranoid you think three world leaders wearing silk Vietnamese robes are members of the Freemasons conspiring together to keep us all enslaved, you think the Cold War was a ruse, and someone who disagrees with you is probably under the sway of CNN or CNBC.

Post: #11

(05-14-2015 12:44 PM)TheWastelander Wrote:  A danger of the Red Pill: you might become so paranoid you think three world leaders wearing silk Vietnamese robes are members of the Freemasons conspiring together to keep us all enslaved, you think the Cold War was a ruse, and someone who disagrees with you is probably under the sway of CNN or CNBC.

Fine - I'll accept the criticism with regard to posting that pic.
Still - Freemasons do play an important role, albeit a minor one being an organisation eliciting control outside of the bounds of the government.

I'll also admit that it was a bit too harsh to call everyone not espousing my worldviews someone as instantly believing everything that CNN says. I came to my conclusions over time not only reading the before mentioned books, but for example the documents of the congressional Reece commission on foundations. I warmly recommend them to anyone: http://www.americandeception.com/ Available here - just use the search function, though other interesting papers can be found on that site.

But I do not consider myself a conspiratorial fucktard and we should be careful when throwing everything out just by association.

That said - those things ultimately do not matter in real life. Our lives down here are very similar - have fun, make the most of life, bang girls, make money, keep your head straight. To cover everything and understand where I am coming from takes some time - I also had actual experiences which reinforced the points I read for example in Carroll Quigley's book. At one time I had the pleasure of visiting the BIS in Switzerland - some of the things I mention here were jokingly uttered to me by a manager there. He found it funny, that the people were not aware of the web of control of the world.

Ah - well - not suitable for the forum frankly - more over a glass of Whiskey when you have time to kill. And even then it's a limited topic except for those themes which might concern you personally - which are few.

Post: #12

If you want an idea of how to ruin a country in the fastest way possible.... Just look at the UK and Sweden.

Post: #13

Ruin the UK?

If you want to ruin a country look no further than Africa, South America, southern Europe and Asia.

Post: #14

(05-14-2015 04:49 PM)Foolsgo1d Wrote:  Ruin the UK?

If you want to ruin a country look no further than Africa, South America, southern Europe and Asia.

I think the UK may be worse than those countries soon enough.

I'd say the UK is more fucked than when the Nazi's were bombing them. Banning free-speech? Holy shit guys.

Post: #15

(05-14-2015 07:44 PM)Samseau Wrote:  I'd say the UK is more fucked than when the Nazi's were bombing them. Banning free-speech? Holy shit guys.

I understand we're all passionate about these topics, but it's important to have some perspective of the bigger picture so we don't get tunnel vision or veer into hyperbole.

As much as I disagree with laws restricting free speech, these new proposed changes can't possibly be worse than a period of time when tens of thousands of civilians died, hundreds of thousands suffered property damage/destruction, and freedom of speech was already curtailed during wartime.

Post: #16

"As much as I disagree with laws restricting free speech, these new proposed changes can't possibly be worse than a period of time when tens of thousands of civilians died, hundreds of thousands suffered property damage/destruction, and freedom of speech was already curtailed during wartime."

I would not be so sure. While Britain was physically under great peril during WWII, it had a spine, a clarity of purpose, will and vision that it seriously lacks today. American officialdom is in similar straits, but there are still a lot of strong willed Americans out there.

Post: #17

It might not be hyperbole though. The whole EU is in a ton of debt, there is an extreme fertility population, and an immigrant group with very different values.


I will say this though. I was completely wrong about the movie V for Vendetta.

I thought it was a good movie, but thought it would have been more realistic if it was a liberal government who had gone full bore totalitarian in Britain.

Looks like its going to be full retard Tories who might do it.

Post: #18

(05-14-2015 07:44 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

(05-14-2015 04:49 PM)Foolsgo1d Wrote:  Ruin the UK?

If you want to ruin a country look no further than Africa, South America, southern Europe and Asia.

I think the UK may be worse than those countries soon enough.

I'd say the UK is more fucked than when the Nazi's were bombing them. Banning free-speech? Holy shit guys.

'The Blitz' and how it was portrayed at the time was for the American population's consumption to encourage it to get into another European war. At the time, Americans saw no reason to defend European empires' Versailles Treaty claims. Around 60,000 civilian died in the Blitz which was modest retaliation to the 10,000s per day that were being bombed and firebombed in Germany.

Post: #19

(05-14-2015 04:49 PM)Foolsgo1d Wrote:  Ruin the UK?

If you want to ruin a country look no further than Africa, South America, southern Europe and Asia.

Let's recall that under Col. Gaddafi, Libya had the highest standard of living in Africa and in European terms, it equalled Croatia's standard of living.

Monied western élites destroyed it and then told Europeans of their 'moral obligation' to accept the 'Camp of the Saints' refugee influx from Libya.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/destroying-...oyed/26686

Post: #20

(05-14-2015 10:32 PM)KorbenDallas Wrote:  It might not be hyperbole though. The whole EU is in a ton of debt, there is an extreme fertility population, and an immigrant group with very different values.


I will say this though. I was completely wrong about the movie V for Vendetta.

I thought it was a good movie, but thought it would have been more realistic if it was a liberal government who had gone full bore totalitarian in Britain.

Looks like its going to be full retard Tories who might do it.

The real truth is that the new UK government and the Tories is that they are not really that "conservative" in many ways these days. Just a lot less "liberal" than the crazy Labour shitbags who wanted to raise taxes, maintain or increase immigration and ramp up pretty much every SJW program they could get their hands on. By the end of the election the Tories were making promises for all sorts of government handouts like new housing just to try to trump Labour. They sometimes sounded like free-spending big government Democrats (or, increasingly, Republicans) by the end.

Peter Hitchens did a great write up on why Cameron and the Tories are very corporatist and corporate welfare promoters, how they have not grown the economy or really made any tough fiscal or economical decisions while in power and how the next few years will probably be more of the same (while the country rots away):

http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2...again.html

Hitchens also did an article on OPs topic that's pretty good as well:

The Abolition of Liberty in the Name of Security

http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk

Couple gems from the article:

"I often ask readers to answer this question.: How do you think a totalitarian regime could or would be installed in a free society such as ours? Is it more likely that it will arrive in some thunderclap, as black-uniformed fanatics seize the state, or that it will grow in our midst by small and popular increments, introduced on the pretext of saving us from a supposed ‘terrorist’ threat?"

"It remains absolutely the case that, with the clear exception of incitement to violence, speech should be free. The law is involved only after a crime has been committed and in a free society cannot and must be used to pre-approve publication or speech. Stifling free speech is the staircase down to slavery. The moment we are having our speeches and articles scanned for ‘extremism’ by policemen we are out of the world of freedom and deep in the territory of tyranny ( Social Democrat public meetings in 19th century Germany could only be held in the presence of a uniformed police officer monitoring the speeches – do you want this?)."

Post: #21

I meant Ruin the country through awful politics.

Fuck, have you seen some of the shit coming out of Sweden lately? It's now illegal to criticise the governments immigration policies. Military personell aren't allowed at national day celebrations. Schools aren't allowed to fly the Swedish flag. Even if you have one at your house, you will be asked to take it down because the cross on it will offend "new swedes". Most convicted rapists are getting less than 18 months in prison. Asylum seekers are landing in Sweden in their own private jets. You only have to spend about 1 hour at the immigration / welfare office to start claiming your $3500 a month for doing nothing.

The UK is fast approaching the same level of ridiculousness.

Post: #22

(05-14-2015 02:17 AM)Spectrumwalker Wrote:  This is speculation only, but for what its worth I believe David Cameron is whipped by his wife. Thus allowing him to fall under the influence of feminine political thoughts. I.E. totalitarianism.

A majority of the time when you see a photo or news footage of him, his wife is holding his hand in the dominant position and leading him like he's a little five year old boy. Next thing you know she'll be leading him by his little pinky finger as he holds his bottle and teddy bear. I see this, I see weakness.

It's the little observations like this that I believe can be quite revealing about the true nature of what lies behind the mask of political leaders. I could be wrong about Mr. Prime Minister. I'm not even British.

Case in point. Even emasculating him on camera like its hardy har funny saying she has to be firm with him. Keep that shit in the house. If your wife can't publicly respect you, how can your people?

If you can't command your wife, you're not fit to command a nation.

Very telling indeed. There she is in dominant leading position while he stays slightly behind. While his body isn't leaning toward hers, it isn't angled away from her as she is to him. His hand is in a supplicating, submissive forward position which she grips it from the front, effectively controlling his movement.

Post: #23

(05-14-2015 11:03 PM)N°6 Wrote:  

(05-14-2015 04:49 PM)Foolsgo1d Wrote:  Ruin the UK?

If you want to ruin a country look no further than Africa, South America, southern Europe and Asia.

Let's recall that under Col. Gaddafi, Libya had the highest standard of living in Africa and in European terms, it equalled Croatia's standard of living.

Monied western élites destroyed it and then told Europeans of their 'moral obligation' to accept the 'Camp of the Saints' refugee influx from Libya.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/destroying-...oyed/26686

Why bring that into this? Anyone with a brain can see we fucked up on that.

I want to know why Cameron's Tory's are ruining so-called free speech and freedoms in the UK. If anything more freedoms were impeded by the EU and copy cat laws from the United States.

Post: #24

(05-14-2015 09:00 PM)LeBeau Wrote:  

(05-14-2015 07:44 PM)Samseau Wrote:  I'd say the UK is more fucked than when the Nazi's were bombing them. Banning free-speech? Holy shit guys.

I understand we're all passionate about these topics, but it's important to have some perspective of the bigger picture so we don't get tunnel vision or veer into hyperbole.

As much as I disagree with laws restricting free speech, these new proposed changes can't possibly be worse than a period of time when tens of thousands of civilians died, hundreds of thousands suffered property damage/destruction, and freedom of speech was already curtailed during wartime.

I have a lot more perspective than you do.

Quote: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 carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, 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 the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to fear. The traitor is the plague.

- Cicero

The bolded part above indicates why I said the Nazi's are less dangerous than the banning of free speech.

Britain is pretty much doomed at this point, it would take an insanely bloody war to reverse things, if it is even possible to mount such a war effort.