The Rainbow Flag/Paedo Rag was originally flown by various indigenous and peace groups Worldwide, before being used by NAMBLA (North American Man Boy Love Association) who were a founding member of the International Lesbian and Gay Association.
NAMBLA and ANTIFA often unite to intimidate people who oppose gay and paedophile “rights”
Sunderland ANTIFA in England openly threaten violence to anyone who opposes their agendas on gay rights and islamification
The Rainbow Flag/Paedo Rag was then spread to the rest of the LGBTP community.
The Rainbow Flag/Paedo Rag was popularised as a symbol of the homosexual and paedophile community by notorious pederast Gilbert Baker in 1978.
Weird freak and notorious pederast Gilbert Baker was a member of NAMBLA
The jewish-controlled mainstream media still cover up its original use by paedophile rights group NAMBLA.
In modern Britain we see the Rainbow Flag/Paedo Rag everywhere. It is flown over MPs homes, Police Stations, 10 Downing Street and they have even lit up the Houses of Parliament in the colours of the Rainbow Flag/Paedo Rag.
The Rainbow Flag/Paedo Rag is used predominantly at gay pride and paedophile power events. It is also used in LGBTP ghettoes worldwide in various forms including banners, clothing and jewellery. Since the 1980s, its symbolism has been transferred to represent the extended “LGBTP” (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transsexual and paedophile) community. The LGBTP community often falsely claim the “P” stands for “pan-sexual”.
Peter Tatchell was Britain’s top paedophile rights activist between 1972 and 2010 – he is often pictured with the Rainbow Flag/Paedo Rag. Is Peter Tatchell A Paedophile Or Simply Misunderstood? goo.gl/1nYZNo
Whether you personally call it the “Rainbow Flag” or “Paedo Rag” surely organisations like the BBC, Police, Courts etc. which are meant to be politically neutral should use a term like “Rainbow Flag/ Paedo Rag” rather than just use “Rainbow Flag”.
In the United Kingdom every household (with a few exceptions) is forced to pay a license fee of £147 (2017) whether they ever watch the BBC or not.
The BBC is notorious for its pro gay and pro paedophile reporting, and its support for multiculturalism (AKA the Kalergi Plan). The BBC also spent decades covering up muslim “grooming gangs” raping, drugging and pimping out up to one million White girls in Britain.
The BBC is only granted its Charter to extort £147 every year from most households in the United Kingdom on the basis of it being politically impartial. This Charter then gives the BBC the right to extort £147 from virtually every household in the UK, and to have houses searched for TV equipment by Capita agents.
Any protest about the BBC’s involvement in paedophile rings and political corruption is usually met with extreme force and violence.
On 10th October 2103 a Freedom Of Information Act request was sent to the BBC asking “Does the BBC have a policy of promoting multiculturalism?” The BBC reply is here:
7 November 2013 Dear Mr Moran Freedom of Information Request – RFI20131470 Thank you for your request under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the Act) received on 10 October, seeking the following information: Does the BBC have a policy of promoting multiculturalism?
The BBC does not have a policy on promoting multiculturalism. Impartiality is one of the BBC’s core editorial values which are set out in the Royal Charter which establishes its constitution and sets out its main obligations. The BBC’s Editorial Guidelines state that: “We wil apply due impartiality to all our subject
matter and wil reflect a breadth and diversity of opinion across our output as a whole, over an appropriate period,
so that no significant strand of thought is knowingly unreflected or under-represented” and that “our output is
forbidden from expressing the opinion of the BBC on current affairs or matters of public policy.” This would apply to any public discourse on multiculturalism as a public policy debate. http://www.bbc.co.uk/editorialguidelines/ However, the Charter does require the BBC to promote six public purposes through its main activities such as its programming. One of the public purposes is Representing the Nations, Regions and Communities. The BBC Trust Purpose Remit document states that this means that “The BBC should ‘promote awareness of
different cultures and alternative viewpoints, through content that reflects the lives of different people and different
communities within the UK”. http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/governance/tools_we_use/public_purposes.html To assist the BBC to meet this purpose, the BBC’s Diversity Strategy includes a strategic equality and diversity objective to “Deliver high quality programming which reflects modern Britain accurately and
authentically” and this objective would be inclusive of reflecting ethnic and religious diversity on air. The strategy also details other aspects of the BBC’s approach to diversity across the corporation’s activity to ensure not just its programming but that its people, its approach to its audience and its strategy for the future are all consciously addressing further diversity. You can find out more about the BBC and diversity at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/diversity/strategy/documents.html
The link for this Freedom Of Information Act request is here:
Written by CigpapersAdditional Material by Watt Tyler
For historical reasons, as a state made up of several separate jurisdictions, the United Kingdom does not have a single unified legal system.
Instead, there is one system for England and Wales, another for Scotland, and a third for Northern Ireland.
In most cases, The Supreme Court sits above all of these as the final court of appeal.
Role of The Supreme Court
The Supreme Court, as well as being the final court of appeal, plays an important role in the development of United Kingdom law.
As an appeal court, The Supreme Court cannot consider a case unless a relevant order has been made in a lower court.
The Supreme Court:
is the final court of appeal for all United Kingdom civil cases, and criminal cases from England, Wales and Northern Ireland
hears appeals on arguable points of law of general public importance
concentrates on cases of the greatest public and constitutional importance
maintains and develops the role of the highest court in the United Kingdom as a leader in the common law world
The Supreme Court hears appeals from the following courts in each jurisdiction: England and Wales
The Court of Appeal, Civil Division
The Court of Appeal, Criminal Division
(in some limited cases) the High Court
The Court of Session
The twelve most senior Judges at the Supreme Court are an odd assortment of jews, freemasons, paedophiles and cultural-marxists. Here are their official biographies:
President of The Supreme Court, The Right Hon the Lord Neuberger of Abbotsbury
Lord Neuberger becomes the second President of the Supreme Court since it was opened by Her Majesty the Queen in October 2009 to replace the Appellate Committee of the House of Lords. He previously held the post of Master of the Rolls from 1 October 2009.
Born on 10 January 1948, Lord Neuberger was educated at Westminster School, later studied Chemistry at Christ Church, Oxford. After graduating he worked at the merchant bank, N M Rothschild & Sons from 1970-1973 until he entered Lincoln’s Inn and was called to the Bar in 1974.
Lord Neuberger was made a Queen’s Counsel (QC) in 1987 and became a Bencher for Lincoln’s Inn in 1993. His first judicial appointment was as a Recorder from 1990 until 1996 when he was appointed a High Court judge in the Chancery Division and was then the Supervisory Chancery Judge for the Midland, Wales and Chester and Western Circuits 2000 – 2004.
In 1999 Lord Neuberger chaired the Advisory Committee on the Spoliation of Art (in the Holocaust). Since 2000 he has been a governor of the University of Arts London and in 2003 became the Chairman of the Schizophrenia Trust.
In January 2004 he was appointed a Lord Justice of Appeal. He also led an investigation for the Bar Council into widening access to the barrister profession. In 2007 he was made a Lord of Appeal in Ordinary and created a life peer as Baron Neuberger of Abbotsbury in the County of Dorset.
Deputy President of The Supreme Court, The Right Hon the Baroness Hale of Richmond
Lady Hale was appointed Deputy President of The Supreme Court in June 2013, succeeding Lord Hope of Craighead.
In January 2004, Lady Hale became the United Kingdom’s first woman Lord of Appeal in Ordinary after a varied career as an academic lawyer, law reformer, and judge. In October 2009 she became the first woman Justice of The Supreme Court.
After graduating from Cambridge in 1966, she taught law at Manchester University from 1966 to 1984, also qualifying as a barrister and practising for a while at the Manchester Bar. She specialised in Family and Social Welfare law, was founding editor of the Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law, and authored a pioneering case book on ‘The Family, Law and Society’.
In 1984 she was the first woman to be appointed to the Law Commission, a statutory body which promotes the reform of the law. Important legislation resulting from the work of her team at the Commission includes the Children Act 1989, the Family Law Act 1996, and the Mental Capacity Act 2005. She also began sitting as an assistant recorder.
In 1994 she became a High Court judge, the first to have made her career as an academic and public servant rather than a practising barrister. In 1999 she was the second woman to be promoted to the Court of Appeal, before becoming the first woman Law Lord.
She retains her links with the academic world as Chancellor of the University of Bristol, Visitor of Girton College, Cambridge, and Visiting Professor of Kings College London. A home maker as well as a judge, she thoroughly enjoyed helping the artists and architects create a new home for The Supreme Court.
Justice of The Supreme Court, The Right Hon the Lord Mance
Lord Mance became a Lord of Appeal in Ordinary in 2005. He was from 1999 to 2005 a Lord Justice of Appeal and from 1993 to 1999 a Judge of the High Court, Queen’s Bench Division, where he also sat in the Commercial Court.
Lord Mance read law at University College, Oxford, spent time with a Hamburg law firm and then practised at the commercial bar and sat as a Recorder until 1993. He chaired various Banking Appeals Tribunals and was a founder director of the Bar Mutual Indemnity Insurance Fund.
He represented the United Kingdom on the Council of Europe’s Consultative Council of European Judges from 2000 to 2011, being elected its first chair from 2000 to 2003. He currently chairs the Executive Council of the International Law Association and the Lord Chancellor’s Advisory Committee on Private International Law. He is a member of the Judicial Integrity Group and of the seven person panel set up under the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (article 255) to give an opinion on candidates’ suitability to perform the duties of Judge and Advocate-General of the European Court of Justice and General Court.
He served from 2007 to 2009 on the House of Lords European Union Select Committee, chairing sub-committee E which scrutinises proposals concerning European law and institutions. In 2006 he chaired a working group under the auspices of the All Party Parliamentary Group on the Great Lakes Region, recommending changes in the procedures for enforcement of the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises, and in 2008 he led an international delegation for the same Group and the Swedish Foundation for Human Rights, reporting on the problems of impunity in relation to violence against women in the Congo.
Justice of The Supreme Court, The Right Hon the Lord Kerr of Tonaghmore
Lord Kerr served as Lord Chief Justice of Northern Ireland from 2004 to 2009, and was the last Lord of Appeal in Ordinary appointed before the creation of The Supreme Court.
Lord Kerr was educated at St Colman’s College, Newry, and read law at Queen’s University, Belfast. He was called to the Bar of Northern Ireland in 1970, and to the Bar of England and Wales at Gray’s Inn in 1974.
He served as Junior Crown Counsel from 1978 to 1983, at which point he took silk and served as Senior Crown Counsel from 1988 to 1993. In 1993 he was appointed a Judge of the High Court and knighted. He became Lord Chief Justice and joined the Privy Council in 2004.
Lord Kerr succeeded Lord Carswell of Killeen as Northern Ireland’s Lord of Appeal in Ordinary on 29 June 2009, the last Law Lord appointed before the creation of The Supreme Court.
Justice of The Supreme Court, The Right Hon the Lord Clarke of Stone-cum-Ebony
Lord Clarke spent 27 years at the bar, specialising in maritime and commercial law, undertaking a wide variety of cases in these areas. He became a Recorder in 1985, sitting in both criminal and civil courts.
He conducted the Marchioness and Bowbelle Inquiries and was appointed Master of the Rolls in 2005. He is the first Justice to be appointed directly to The Supreme Court.
He was appointed to the High Court Bench in 1993 and in April that year succeeded Mr. Justice Sheen as the Admiralty Judge. He also sat in the Commercial Court and the Crown Court trying commercial and criminal cases respectively.
Appointed to the Court of Appeal in 1998, he was called upon to conduct first the Thames Safety Inquiry and in the following year the Marchioness and Bowbelle Inquiries. On 1 October 2005 he was appointed Master of the Rolls and Head of Civil Justice.
Justice of The Supreme Court, The Right Hon Lord Wilson of Culworth
In 1967, after reading jurisprudence at Worcester College, Oxford, Lord Wilson was called to the Bar of England and Wales; and for the next 26 years, first as a junior and ultimately in silk, he practised almost exclusively in the field of family law.
From 1993 until 2005 he was a judge of the Family Division of the High Court. From 2005 until May 2011 he was a judge of the Court of Appeal.
In May 2011 he became a Justice of The Supreme Court.
After reading history at Magdalen College, Oxford, and serving for four years as a history Fellow of the College, Lord Sumption was called to the Bar (Inner Temple) in 1975 and took Silk in 1986. His practice covered all aspects of Commercial, EU and Competition, Public and Constitutional Law.
He was appointed as a Deputy High Court Judge in 1992 and served as a Recorder between 1993 and 2001. He was appointed as a Judge of the Courts of Appeal of Jersey and Guernsey in 1995. In January 2012 he became a Justice of The Supreme Court.
Lord Sumption was a Judicial Appointments Commissioner from 2006 to 2011. He is also an accomplished historian.
Justice of The Supreme Court, The Right Hon Lord Carnwath of Notting Hill, CVO
After studying law at Trinity College, Cambridge, Lord Carnwath was called to the Bar (Middle Temple) in 1968 and took silk in 1985. He served as Attorney General to the Prince of Wales from 1988 to 1994.
He was a judge of the Chancery Division from 1994 to 2002, during which time (1998 to 2002) he was also Chairman of the Law Commission. Lord Carnwath was appointed to the Court of Appeal in 2002.
Between 2007 and 2012 he was Senior President of Tribunals and led the planning and implementation of the reforms of the tribunal system following the Leggatt report.
Justice of The Supreme Court, The Right Hon Lord Hughes of Ombersley
Lord Hughes was called to the Bar (Inner Temple) in 1970 and served as a Recorder of the Crown Court from 1985 to 1997. He became a Queen’s Counsel in 1990 and was later appointed a judge of the High Court (Family Division from 1997 to 2003; and Queen’s Bench Division from 2004 to 2006).
In 2006, he was appointed a judge of the Court of Appeal of England and Wales, serving as the Vice President of its Criminal Division from 2009 until his appointment as Justice of the Supreme Court in April 2013.
Justice of The Supreme Court, The Right Hon Lord Toulson
Lord Toulson was called to the Bar (Inner Temple) in 1969 and became a bencher in 1995. He became a Queen’s Counsel in 1986 and served as a Recorder of the Crown Court from 1987 to 1996. In 1996, he was appointed to the High Court (Queen’s Bench Division). He sat in the Commercial Court and in the Administrative Court and was then Presiding Judge on the Western Circuit from 1997 to 2002.
Between 2002 and 2006, Lord Toulson was Chairman of the Law Commission of England and Wales, after which he was appointed to the Court of Appeal of England and Wales in 2007. He has also served on the Judicial Appointments Commission for England and Wales.
Lord Toulson was appointed Justice of the Supreme Court in April 2013.
Justice of The Supreme Court, The Right Hon Lord Hodge
Lord Hodge was admitted to the Faculty of Advocates in 1983 and appointed a Queen’s Counsel in 1996. From 1997 – 2003, he was a part time Law Commissioner at the Scottish Law Commission.
Prior to his appointment to the Supreme Court in April 2013, Lord Hodge was the Scottish Judge in Exchequer Causes and one of the Scottish Intellectual Property Judges. He was also a Judge in the Lands Valuation Appeal Court and a Commercial Judge.
Lord Hodge joined the Supreme Court in October 2013 as one of the two Scottish Justices.
On 11th June 2015 the cigpapers team sent a mailshot to the above twelve Supreme Court Judges. The mailshot was simply three of our leaflets with Coudenhove-Kalergi on one side and United Nations Resolution 260 against genocide on the other side in each envelope. The mailshot was sent to the Judges at House of Lords, Parliament, London, SW1A OAA as no stamp is required when writing to the Judges as members of the House of Lords.
36 leaflets at 1.2 pence each = 43.2 pence
12 envelopes at 1.5 pence each = 18 pence
TOTAL COST = £0:61
TOTAL TIME = 10 minutes
All of our leaflets and stickers are available to buy. Email firstname.lastname@example.org to order and pay.
The copyright-free pdf files for the leaflets are here:
JEWS CONTROL BRITAIN AND ARE COMMITTING GENOCIDE ON US.
Here’s how it happened:
1066: In return for financial support William The Conqueror brought the jews to England with him. The jews soon acquired a reputation as extortionate moneylenders which made them extremely unpopular with both the Church and the general public.
1290: King Edward I finally expelled the jews from England. The jews swore their revenge.
Expulsion and relocation of jews during the Middle Ages.
1649: The jews financed Oliver Cromwell’s otherthrowing and beheading of Stuart King Charles I after he refused them control of England’s finances.
1655: The jews were readmitted to England by their puppet Oliver Cromwell.
1660: With the British People becoming sick of austerity under the jewish puppet Oliver Cromwell, Charles Stuart landed in Dover in May 1660 and was restored as King Charles II of England, Wales, Scotland and Ireland to wide popular acclaim. The jews planned their revenge.
1688: The jews ordered William III Prince of Orange (formerly a Dutch soldier called William Stadholder)to land in England at Torbay. Because of an ongoing Campaign of L’Infamie against King James II contrived by the jews, he abdicated and fled to France.
King William III of Orange
1694: William III of Orange (AKA William Stadholder) who the jews had installed as the King of England, asked the jews for financial help to keep the Stuarts at bay. Jews issued first bank notes on interest to William of Orange and first central bank had its beginnings. The Bank Of England was established.
1697:London Stock Exchange became the world’s largest “purse.” Twelve ruling seats were reserved for jews only.
1701: The Bank of England establish the Bevis Marks Synagogue in the City of London.
1714: The jews install King George I (AKA Georg Ludwig 1660-1727) from the House of Hanover as the British King. There were, and still are, allegations that the House of Hanover are secretly jewish.
1715: James Stuart (AKA The Old Pretender), son of King James II, invaded Scotland and attempted unsuccessfully to take back the British Crown from the jews.
1745: The Stuarts made their final attempt to take back Britain from the jews by invading England with an army made up of Scottish Highland Clans under Bonnie Prince Charlie (1720-1788) grandson of King James II. Finally defeated at the Battle of Culloden in 1746. Bonnie Prince Charlie went in to exile and the British Royal House of Stuart came to an end.
Bonnie Prince Charlie made one last attempt to free the British People from enslavement to the jews in 1745.
1750: The House of the Red Shield (Rothschild) was established and became prime money-lenders to the British Crown.
1753: King George II, a pawn of the Rothschilds and Amsterdam jewish bankers, passed a Naturalization Bill allowing jews to become British subjects.
1757: Following Clive of India’s victory at Plassey The East India Company seized control of Bengal, India’s richest province, and got seriously involved in the opium trade.They also tripled local taxes leading to the starvation of 10 million Indians.
1773: Warren Hastings brought all opium production under the monoply control of The Bank of England. Eventually 17 million Chinese died of drug addiction as 2000 chests of opium were exported every year.
1773: Mayer Rothschild created the World Revolutionary Movement and Red-Flag Socialism as the banksters’ means of overthrowing National ruling elites (e.g. French and Russian Revolutions). Red-Flag socialism and the political groups that adhere to it have always been created and controlled by the Rothschilds. The red flag is the flag of the Rothschilds family – Rothschild means red shield.
1789: Mayer Rothschild organised the French Revolution, and mass murder of the French aristocracy, to seize control of the French economy by privatising the Bank Of France.
The French revolutionaries often used the red flag of the World Revolutionary Movement.
1803: The Bank Of France was privatised and a National Debt, to be paid off by income tax, was fraudulently established.
1808: Napoleon became master of Europe after seizing control of France back from the jews. He issued a decree which the jews termed the Decret Infame (Infamous Decree). The Decret Infame placed many justifiable restrictions on the jews. The jews planned their revenge.
Napoleon fought to free Europe from austerity through debt-enslavement to jewish central bankers.
1814 to 1815: James & Nathan Rothschild ordered all European rulers to assemble at the Congress of Vienna. The Rothschilds drafted a plan that would make it impossible for another Napoleon to rise to power by creating a European “balance of power.” – this basically meant that if any European Nation revolted against jewish control all the jew controlled Nations would attack it.
1815:The Battle of Waterloo signified the end of Napoleon’s heroic anti-jewish rule and the Christian domination of Europe. Both James Rothschild of France and Nathan Rothschild of England financed Wellington’s victory over Napoleon at Waterloo.Nathan Rothschild used false information, about Napoleon winning Waterloo, to defraud the London Stock Exchange and seize control of Britain’s economy.
1882:The East India Company funded the “Opium Trust”.
1884:The Fabian Society was formed with jewish industrialist financing. A faux elite group, of pseudo-intellectuals and sexual deviants, who formed a semi-secret society for the purpose of bringing Red-Flag socialism (AKA jewish racial supremacy and Globalisation) to the World through the infiltration of Workers’ Groups and Political Parties i.e. The Labour Party.
1890: The largest munitions factory in the world, Vickers of England, was established by the Rothschilds. The stage was set for the Rothschild’s engineering of World War I and all future wars.
1906: Guglielmo Marconi’s invention of the radio is marketed and taken over by the Jew, David Sarnoff. Sarnoff established the Marconi Company in England and RCA in America. Thus began the Jewish control of the World’s media.
1910: Jews took over the office of Minister of Finance throughout Europe. Louis Klotz became Minister of Finance of France; Michael Luzzati of Italy; Bernhard Dernburg of Germany; Rufus Isaacs of England; and Djavid Bey of Turkey. All jews.
1914:The Vickers Munitions Company, owned by the Rothschilds, engineered World War I.
1916: Germany was winning World War One. The jews promised to obtain American support in exchange for Britain supporting Zionism. Prime Minister Lloyd George accepted the offer. Samuel Untermeyer blackmailed American President Wilson in to the USA joining World War One.
1917: Lord Balfour made formal Lloyd George’s capitulation to Weizmann in a letter to Lord Rothschild known as The Balfour Declaration. The Zionist theft of Arab lands was made “official.”
1917: The Rothschilds funded Lenin and Trotsky with $20 million (real names Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov and Lev Bronshtein – both jews) via the Schiff banking family to otherthrow the Russian Tsar and murder him and his family by a Red-Flag revolution. The Rothschilds then privatised the Russian Central Bank and enslaved the Russian people to a jewish Red-Flag socialist elite. Russsia was the first Red-Flag jewish dictatorship and between 20 to 100 million White Christians were murdered in an orgy of executions, rape, torture and enslavement.
The flag of Communist Russia – there is a Satanic pentagram representing jews (ruling) above the industrial workers (hammer) and agricultural workers (sickle). In the background is the red flag of the Rothschilds.
1919: The jews insured Germany’s humiliation with their Treaty of Versailles. The jew Bernard Baruch advised Wilson at the conference. The jew Phillip Sassoon, the Parliamentary Private Secretary, advised Lloyd George. The jew, Georges Mandel, (aka Louis Rothschild), French Minister of the Interior, advised Georges Clemenceau.
1922: Jew Richard Coudenhove-Kalergi founded the Pan-European Movement in Vienna with the purpose of creating a New World Order based on a federation of Nations led by the USA. Banker Max Warburg donated 60,000 Marks to set it up.
1925: Jew Richard Coudenhove-Kalergi wrote the book Practical Idealism which laid down the blueprint for a new Europe. In his book Kalergi indicated that the residents of a future Europe will not be White, but due to miscegenation, will be a mongrel race of Asian/White/Negroes to serve a jewish aristocracy. He also suggested the destruction of Individual Nation States to create a United States of Europe. There is still a Coudenhove-Kalergi Prize given out every two years to the European Politician who has done most to support this genocide.
1933: International jewry declared all out war on the German People and swear to destroy them after they threw off the shackles of jewish oppression.
1939: The jewish puppet, and British Prime Minister, Neville Chamberlain declared war on Nationalist Socialist Germany on September 3rd 1939, after Germany struggled to free itself from jewish oppression. The pretext was the war between Poland and Germany that Poland had instigated.
1945: The jewish controlled allies, led by jewish puppet Winston Churchill, defeat Nationalist Socialist Germany. After their surrender over 1 million German soldiers are murdered by the jewish allies including boys as young as 14. About 1 million more Germans are taken by the jew Bolshevik Russians as slaves and worked to death. The mass rape of German Women in East Prussia is effectively a genocide.
1946 to 1949: The jewish controlled Allies put on a show trial called the “The Nuremberg Trials” where the Germans are found guilty and the Holocaust myth is created. The Germans are forced to pay for the creation of Israel.
1948: The jews started their genocide of White Britain with the arrival of Windrush on 22nd June 1948, a boatload of negroes from West India. The Zionist press claimed this was to deal with an alleged labour shortage in Britain.
The Windrush arrives on June 22nd 1948 and the genocide of the British People starts.
1958: The Notting Hill riots happened when the negroes sought to assert themselves through violence following members of the British White Working Class fighting back against anti-White violence.
1965: The jews introduced the notorious Race Relations Act 1965 making it a civil offence (rather than a criminal offence) to refuse to deal with people due to their National or racial origins.
1966: The jews introduced the Race Relations Board to deal with complaints under the Race Relations Act. The intention was to smash any resistance to integration AKA White genocide.
1973: The jewish puppet, moral degenerate, paedophile and British Prime Minister Edward Heath (1916-2005) took the UK in to the European Economic Community. Later Knighted by Queen Elizabeth II.
British Prime Minister Edward Heath – internationalist, degenerate, paedophile and traitor.
1976: The jews introduced the Race Relations Act 1976 to further promote White genocide and smash any resistance.
1981: The Brixton riots happened when the negroes refused to be subjected to British Laws and customs.
1994: The Leader of the Labour Party, John Smith QC MP, dies of a heart attack and is replaced by jewish puppet Tony Blair. The Labour Party is renamed New Labour AKA Jew Labour. Labour MP Tam Dalyell complains publically about the jewish cabal running the Labour movement. Tony Blair vows to clear New Labour of any racists i.e. anyone opposed to White genocide.
1995: The Barcelona Agreement is signed between all European Countries and Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Egypt, Jordan, Palestinian Authority, Syria, Lebanon, Turkey and Israel. The Barcelona Agreement is a legal contract to carry out the Kalergi Plan. The Barcelona Agreement is concealed by Governments and the jewish-controlled main stream media from the general population. .
1997: Jew Labour, using jewish Lord Levy’s personal puppet Tony Blair to front it, win a landslide election with Zionist media backing.
Tony Blair fronted Jew Labour for the jew Zionists.
1997: Jew Labour leader Tony Blair and his jewish cronies including Jack Straw, Barbara Roche and Johnathan Portes opened the floodgates to Third World immigration to hasten the genocide of White Britain. Between 1997 and 2010 Jew Labour allowed up to 8 million Third Worlders in to Britain.
1998: The leader of Jew Labour Tony Blair publicly states “It is time to implement Practical Idealism“. Most British People failed to notice this seemingly political oxymoron and its hidden reference to White genocide.
2013: Muslims in Britain perform their first public beheading on 22nd May 2013 in London.Their victim is British Army soldier, Fusilier Lee Rigby of the Royal Regiment of Fusiliers.
ARE WHITE BRITAINS TREATED AS SECOND CLASS IN THEIR OWN COUNTRY?
Written by Brittania
Photos and captions by Watt Tyler
Are white British people, the indigenous people of Britain, treated with the same consideration, respect, care and concern as other people are ………..…as immigrants are?
Imagine a country that was built, developed and defended for thousands of years by a beautiful, fair, strong, smart, brave and creative indigenous people. The country flourished and the people were happy. Then imagine a hostile government takes control of the country and floods in millions of immigrants, this invasion to the detriment of the indigenous people. Thousands of the indigenous women and children are raped by the immigrants, poverty increases for the indigenous people, but they are not allowed to fight back, in fact, they are not even allowed to express dissent. They are to submit to the invasion, the occupation, all the deprivations and harms, and they are to remain silent about it. In fact, in a cruel and controlling manner, the government tries to make them celebrate the invasion (and finance it and its associated costs). There will be no more indigenous people in time; some of the government and their friends openly boast of this fact, of a future when the race of indigenous people with their fair skins will no longer exist and ‘everyone will be coffee-coloured’. Have these indigenous people been treated as inferior in any way?
Mass immigration has brought much suffering and harm to the indigenous people of Britain(1), including: the increases in many types of crime, such as the many thousands of rapes, many victims merely children; the importation of diseases; the lowering of wages and working conditions for the non-wealthy; reductions in freedoms; inhibition of indigenous culture; the shortages of and strains on resources, including housing; financial burdens in taxes; race riots; the strife and stress that diversity brings, including the reductions in fraternity, security and social capital; etc. Without immigration, the people of this country would not suffer these problems that immigration has brought(2). Indigenous people have suffered for the gain of immigrants…so one group loses for another group to gain… ‘equality’ anyone?
On a fundamental level, immigrants want to come and most indigenous people do not want them to – one group’s preferences are put above those of a less important group (the ‘second class’/’inferior’ indigenous group). If an immigrant wants a better life, then indigenous people are to have a worse life to facilitate this. Some suggest limiting your birth rates to accommodate immigrants (3), but their wanting to move to your country is not to be limited, oh no. Immigration has caused areas of the country to be largely occupied by immigrant groups – the government has effectively given parts of the land away without the consent of the indigenous people. White Brits are now the minority in London(4). Your land was given away, theirs was not. Not very ‘equal’. Perhaps less easily remedied, there is the threat of genocide to the indigenous people(5). Territory and existence are fundamental to a group, and both are threatened by immigration. These threats and realities cause stress and concern amongst indigenous people, but not amongst immigrants (since they are not losing anything in this respect).
The very fact of immigration puts one group (the immigrants) above the other group in relation to many issues. In this sense, there cannot be ‘equality’ as between immigrants and indigenous people, because the very fact of immigration has breached many of the ‘rights’ of indigenous people and has put the immigrants’ desires and wants as more important than those of the indigenous people. In the social and political sense, ‘equality’ is a nebulous-power-word(6), but many of its forms are simply not possible in the context of immigration: these two concepts are incompatible.
Indigenous people are also treated as second class in other ways. Can you object to immigration? Immigrants can object to anything you do, but can you really object to them being here? Not always easy without some potential loss to yourself. This loss in freedom of speech(7) again is not applied equally, and even if it were, it is only the indigenous people who would wish to exercise it. Various means are used to silence dissent, of course the nebulous-power-word ‘racism’(8) is thrown around, but also certain legal, social, financial and professional consequences can ensue if one dares to object – and they are going to make the grip on free speech even tighter yet(9) (if they can get away with it).
And how does the legal system treat you? We frequently hear that blacks are picked on by the police, (e.g. with more stop and searches than whites); but is this proportionate to the amount of crime they commit? Are men ‘picked on’ by the police by being stopped for rapes at a higher rate than women are? If crime rates differ, then police action rates also should reflect this were the police to be acting ‘equally’ in this respect. Where there is a glaring inequality before the law is in relation to the manner in which the legal system bends over backwards not to ‘offend’ immigrants, this at the expense of the indigenous white Brits. For example, the mass child rape and abuse noted in Rotherham was allowed to continue for decades(10). Would the legal system have allowed thousands of little black or Asian girls to be raped and abused by white men for decades(11)? And the police response time?…well, 16 years and still waiting…And the ‘racial equality’ laws, well, again, not really applied in an equal manner. For example, a pack attack on a white woman by immigrants shouting ‘kill the white slag’ is not considered as a racial(12)…imagine the other way round…well, imagine it, but don’t speak of it cause that might cause offence….and nobody wants to be called ‘racist’, or arrested(13).
And the media, all heard of Stephen Lawrence? Of course you have, the government (= the working man and woman paying taxes) has spent untold fortunes in relation to this case, and even changed the law so that defendants can be tried again(14) if acquitted (double jeopardy). Another fundamental protection removed to please immigrants (and, inter alia, to suppress and oppress indigenous people). But what about the little girl murdered on the bus by a black man while she was on her way to school? Vaguely remember the case? But can you remember her name(15)? What about a black man raping many elderly people in their own homes? Know his name(16)? Or any black cannibals in recent times(17)? Got any names? Has Kriss Donald’s(18) family been lavished with awards and money by the government? Any award ceremonies being held in his name(19)? Does the media frequently mention his name? Or any white victims’ names? When a little white girl as tortured and repeatedly raped and then taken to be shot dead, the media description on the day of the then wanted suspects omitted their race, but managed to broadcast that the car was ‘maroon’ in colour(20). Do you know her name? Does the media make all victims’ and perpetrators’ names equally salient to the public? Or are indigenous people not shown the same concern as are immigrants? The media go to great lengths to conceal the level of crime committed by immigrants(21), and to mislead the public into believing that ‘whitey’ is the bad one(22). Immigration is to be portrayed as beneficial to the country, and immigrants as victims of bad whites. This misrepresentation of the truth is admitted to by various journalists(23), and such behaviour is actually found in various guidelines to journalists, e.g. that in relation to immigrants, journalists are told to ‘find positive stories’ (National Union of Journalists, NUJ, Guidelines). Mass deception(24), and since this gives preferential and unfairly favourable treatment to immigrants and thus lower concern to white Brits, then this is not treating white Brits with the same respect/concern as other groups are treated(25). Not to mention the media coverage of any political party that dares to object to immigration…
Often it is claimed that more immigrants should have certain jobs or educational places, etc. This might be labelled as affirmative action, ‘equality and diversity’(26) or suchlike(27), but if some groups are to be given the jobs/places, then this can only be at the expense of other people. To call this ‘equality’ is untrue: this is blatantly unequal and treats one group (white Brits) as second class. If you are not given the job because you are a white Brit, then you have been treated as lesser. And for a non-indigenous person to be given the favourable treatment, this can only mean unfavourable treatment to the white Brit. Can’t have one without the other.
Perhaps you are offended that you are being treated as a second class person in your own country, but the very idea of offence is not applied equally to you either. White Brits must be very careful not to offend the immigrants(28). However, if you are offended by their presence and/or by any of their behaviours, or even by the very fact that you are not considered as equal of respect as they are, then you better keep quiet about it. White Brits being offended does not count in the same way, and can cause problems for those who express it. Offence only really counts if it is immigrants offended ..is this not an offensive fact? SShhhhhhhhhh…you mustn’t cause offence to the more important people. Their being offended is more important than your existence.
So, second class might not be strong enough, perhaps third or fourth, but remember not to complain about immigration. While you sit in a choked traffic jam from your cramped over-priced home on your way to work at a job under your immigrant affirmative-action-boss, working to pay high taxes to help support the immigration, remember that the stresses under which you live, the lack of freedoms, the crime, the occupation of your country, the genocide…remember that even if you feel offended by any of this, keep quiet and don’t say anything that might offend the masters. How low are you that you can’t even express dissent? Maybe not even fourth…
NASA Apollo Moon Landing – did they make it or did they fake it?
On the 20th July 1969 NASA (National Aeronautics and Space Administration) claimed to have landed the first men on the Moon (Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin) with their Apollo 11 mission. NASA claimed to have made another five manned Moon landings ( Apollo Missions 12, 14, 15, 16 and 17) with Apollo 17 being the final mission landing on 7th December 1972. NASA still claims a total of 12 American astronauts walked on the Moon. All the alleged Moon landings used the Saturn V rocket system. The total cost of the Apollo missions is estimated at £203 billion in 2013 US dollars.
NASA was established by President Dwight D. Eisenhower and became operational on 1st October 1958.
NASA gives the distance from the centre of Earth to the centre of the Moon as 239,000 miles. Since the Earth has a radius of about 4,000 miles and the Moon’s radius is roughly 1,000 miles, that leaves a surface-to-surface distance of 234,000 miles. The total distance traveled during the alleged missions, including Earth and Moon orbits, ranged from 622,268 miles for Apollo 13 to 1,484,934 miles for Apollo 17. It is accepted by the majority of People that the Apollo Moon landings were genuine, however the Cuban School National Curriculum and a growing number of sceptics claim the Apollo missions were faked. Even though this blog in no way alleges that Nazi war criminals faked the Moon landings we did find these 20 amazing facts:
1. Wernher von Braun:
Wernher Magnus Maximilian, Freiherr von Braun (March 23, 1912 – June 16, 1977) was a German rocket engineer and space architect. He was one of the leading figures in the development of rocket technology in Germany during World War II and, subsequently, in the United States. He is credited as being the “Father of Rocket Science”. In his 20s and early 30s, von Braun was the central figure in the Nazis’ rocket development program, responsible for the design and realization of the V-1 and V-2 combat rockets during World War II.
One of von Braun’s V-2 Nazi rockets from World War Two. Firing these on a civilian population was a war crime.
Werner von Braun’s SS number was 185,068 and his Nazi Party membership number was 5,738,692, he ended the war as a SS Major. After the war, he and some select members of his rocket team were taken to the United States as part of the then-secret Operation Paperclip.
Wernher von Braun in 1941. If it hadn’t been for Operation Paperclip von Braun and his team would almost certainly have faced war crime charges at Nuremberg for their role in the V-1 and V-2 rocket attacks on England during World War Two.
Operation Paperclip involved the USA taking a large number of German scientists, technicians and other staff to the USA after the war. The USA also appropriated about 300,000 German scientific patents.
Werner von Braun with American President John F Kennedy.
Former Nazi “Peenemunde” V-1 assistant Kurt H. Debus – who went on to become the first director of the Kennedy Space Center – helped develop the Saturn V rockets (designed in part after their V-1 Nazi rockets)
Kurt H Debus became the first Director Of John F Kennedy Space Centre.
Werner von Braun in Florida with the Saturn V rocket carrying the Apollo 11 Lunar Mission in 1969.
2. Die Frau im Mond (The Woman in the Moon) Film:
In 1929 a German filmmaker called Fritz Lang released a silent film called Die Frau im Mond (The Woman in the Moon). The film’s technical adviser on the film was Herman Oberth, considered to be one of the three founding fathers of rocketry. Assisting Oberth on the film project was one of his brightest students, teenager Wernher von Braun.
The totally unnecessary vertical construction of the spaceship in a specially built hangar is the same in the film Die Frau im Mond and the Apollo Missions.
A decade-and-a-half later, both Oberth and von Braun would be scooped up through Operation Paperclip and brought to America to work on the Apollo Missions, whose choreography just happened to very closely match that of the fake Moon launch Oberth and von Braun had crafted forty years earlier.
Another still from the 1929 film.
Maybe it’s just a coincidence that a 1929 silent German film had the same rocket technology as 1960s/70s American Moon landings.
The grand opening of the massive hangar doors and the excruciatingly slow roll-out of the upright rocket ship from the hangar to the launch pad are the same in the 1929 film and the Apollo Missions.
Both the film (Die Frau im Mond) and the Apollo Missions also both had the famous countdowns and the cheering, patriotic crowds.
Cheering crowds during the countdown in the 1929 film.
Screenclip from the silent film “Die Frau im Mond”.
The 1929 silent film Die Frau im Mond had a storyline that was a cross between Apollo Mission 11 (first alleged man on the Moon) and Apollo Mission 13 (aborted Moon landing after an oxygen tank allegedly exploded).
Not Jim Lovell on Apollo Mission 13 but actually the 1929 film “Die Frau im Mond”.
The 1929 silent film Die Frau im Mond and the 1960s/1970s Apollo Missions both had the same team of technical advisers.
3. America Versus Russia In The Space Race:
After World War Two America and Russia entered in to an arms race and a space race. Until the Apollo Moon landings Russia had beaten the Americans in every “first” in the space race:
May 15, 1957 – The Soviet Union tests the R-7 Semyorka, the world’s first intercontinental ballistic missile.
October 4, 1957 – The Soviets launch Sputnik 1, Earth’s first manmade satellite.
November 3, 1957 – A dog named Laika becomes the first animal to enter Earth orbit aboard the Soviet Sputnik 2.
January 2, 1959 – The Soviet Luna 1 becomes the first manmade object to leave Earth’s orbit.
September 13, 1959 – After an intentional crash landing, the Soviet Luna 2 becomes the first manmade object on the Moon.
October 6, 1959 – The Soviet Luna 3 provides mankind with its first look at the far side of the Moon.
August 20, 1960 – Belka and Strelka, aboard the Soviet Sputnik 5, are the first animals to safely return from Earth orbit.
October 14, 1960 – The Soviet Marsnik 1, the first probe sent from Earth to Mars, blasts off.
February 12, 1961 – The Soviet Venera 1, the first probe sent from Earth to Venus, blasts off.
April 12, 1961 – Yuri Gagarin, riding aboard the Soviet Vostok 1, becomes the first man in Earth orbit.
May 19, 1961 – The Soviet Venera 1 performs the first ever fly by of another planet (Venus).
August 6, 1961 – Gherman Titov, aboard the Soviet Vostok 2, becomes the first man to spend over a day in space and the first to sleep in Earth orbit.
August 11 & 12, 1962 – The Soviet Vostok 3 and Vostok 4 are launched, the first simultaneous manned space flights (though they do not rendezvous).
October 12, 1964 – The Soviet Voskhod 1, carrying the world’s first multi-man crew, is launched.
March 18, 1965 – Aleksei Leonov, riding aboard the Soviet Voskhod 2, performs the first space-walk.
February 3, 1966 – The Soviet Luna 9 becomes the first probe to make a controlled, ‘soft’ landing on the Moon.
March 1, 1966 – The Soviet Venera 3, launched November 16, 1965, becomes the first probe to impact another planet (Venus).
April 3, 1966 – The Soviet Luna 10 becomes the first manmade lunar satellite.
October 30, 1967 – The Soviet Cosmos 186 and Cosmos 188 become the first unmanned spacecraft to rendezvous and dock in Earth orbit. The United States will not duplicate this maneuver for nearly four decades.
January 16, 1969 – The Soviet Soyuz 4 and Soyuz 5 become the first manned spacecraft to dock in Earth orbit and the first to exchange crews.
November 17, 1970 – The Soviet Lunokhod 1, the first robotic rover to land on and explore an extraterrestrial body, lands on the Moon. Twenty-seven years later, the United States lands it’s very first robotic rover on Mars.
December 15, 1970 – The Soviet Venera 7 becomes the first probe to make a soft landing on another planet (Venus).
April 19, 1971 – The Soviet Salyut 1 becomes the world’s first orbiting space station.
August 22, 1972 – The Soviet Mars 2 becomes the first probe to reach the surface of Mars.
On April 14, 1961, two days after Gagarin’s historic flight, a panicked President Kennedy reportedly inquired of NASA what goal in space America might be able to attain before the Soviets. According to legend, President Kennedy was told that America’s best hope to beat the Russians was with a manned Moon landing. At Rice University on September 12th, 1962 President Kennedy made the following speech setting the goal of the Moon landings by the end of the 1960s:
4. NASA Has Lost All Data, Blueprints And Records From The Apollo Missions:
Following Freedom Of Information requests in America NASA admitted it had lost all their original video footage of the Apollo Missions. Unfortunately, it isn’t just the video footage that is missing. Also allegedly beamed back from the Moon was voice data, biomedical monitoring data, and telemetry data to monitor the location and mechanical functioning of the spaceship. All of that data, the entire alleged record of the Moon landings, was on the 13,000+ reels that are said to be ‘missing.’ Also missing, according to NASA and its various subcontractors, are the original plans/blueprints for the lunar modules. And for the spacesuits and lunar rovers. And for the entire multi-sectioned Saturn V rockets.
NASA have lost all records of the Apollo Missions – that’s 700 cartons altogether.
5. The Apollo A7L Space Suits Used In The Apollo Missions:
The Space Suits used in the Apollo Missions were the A7L design.International Latex Corporation, which was best known as the manufacturer of Playtex bras and girdles, was awarded the contract. Hamilton Standard was awarded the contract to design and build the life-support packs known as PLSS units. All designs and blueprints for the A7L space suits have been lost.
NASA’s officially released photograph of the Apollo Missions Space Suit A7L.
Conditions on the Moon are very different to Earth as there is no atmosphere. The temperature in sunlight is estimated by NASA to be 107 degrees Celsius (225 degrees Fahrenheit) and in the shade is minus 153 degrees Celsius (minus 243 degrees Fahrenheit). There is also a constant bombardment of meteoroids.“Meteoroids,” NASA states, “are nearly-microscopic specks of space dust that fly through space at speeds often exceeding 50,000 mph – ten times faster than a speeding bullet. They pack a considerable punch … The tiny space bullets can plow directly into Moon rocks, forming miniature and unmistakable craters.” There is also the problem of massive space radiation on the Moon as there is no atmosphere like on Earth to protect it.
NASA diagram of the shield it believes will be required to protect astronauts in future Moon landings from radiation and meteoroids. NASA didn’t bother with this in the 1960s and 1970s.
NASA has now stated that maintaining 100% clean-room conditions on space exploration vehicles while performing EVAs on planetary bodies is essential as even the smallest amount of dust could cripple any space ship. Their solution for future Moon landings is the “rear-entry spacesuit” which is attached to the outside of a lunar module and is climbed in to before detaching from the lunar module. The procedure is reversed to get back in the lunar module.
NASA diagram of the rear-entry spacesuit it has designed for future Moon landings. In the 1960s and 1970s NASA didn’t worry about details like clean-room conditions.
The A7L must have been a remarkable spacesuit, it was radiation proof, able to withstand 50,000 MPH meteoroids and able to switch between 107 degrees Celsius (225 degrees Fahrenheit) and minus 153 degrees Celsius (minus 243 degrees Fahrenheit) in an instant. The A7L also had a full life-support system, oxygen and human waste management. Unfortunately we can not inspect, or even recreate, these spacesuits as NASA claims it has lost all the designs and blueprints. NASA claims the spacesuits themselves were left on the Moon to save weight on the return journey.
6. The Van Allen Radiation Belts:
The Van Allen radiation belts are two regions of radiation that encircle the Earth. They are named in honor of James Van Allen, the scientist who led the team that launched the first successful satellite that could detect radioactive particles in space. This was Explorer 1, which launched in 1958 and led to the discovery of the radiation belts. There is a large outer belt that follows the magnetic field lines essentially from the north to south poles around the planet. This belt begins around 8,400 to 36,000 miles above the surface of the Earth. The inner belt does not extend as far north and south. It runs, on average, from 60 miles about the Earth’s surface to about 6,000 miles. The two belts expand and shrink. Sometimes the outer belt nearly disappears. Sometimes it swells so much that the two belts appear to merge to form one big radiation belt.In 1969-70 the Van Allen Belt was at it’s 11 year cycle peak radiation
Due to the Van Allen radiation belts no manned space craft has ever travelled more than 400 miles above the Earth’s surface, apart from the Apollo missions. On June 24, 2005, NASA made this rather remarkable admission: “NASA’s Vision for Space Exploration calls for a return to the Moon as preparation for even longer journeys to Mars and beyond. But there’s a potential showstopper: radiation. Space beyond low-Earth orbit is awash with intense radiation from the Sun and from deep galactic sources such as supernovas … Finding a good shield is important.” The Russians have calculated that to protect their cosmonauts from radiation a 4 foot (120cm) thick lead casing would be needed.
7. Shadows On Moon Photographs:
According to NASA the Apollo Moon missions carried no lighting equipment, and the only light source for Apollo photographs and videos was the sun. Despite this there seems to be at least two light sources on a number of Apollo photographs due to there being shadows cast in two directions.Here is an example of these two light source photographs:
In other photographs it appears the light source is much closer than the Sun would be:
8. The Lunar Explorer Modules:
The Lunar Explorer Modules (LEM) were the part of the Apollo missions that detached from the Command Service Modules (CSM)and descended to the Moon’s surface. The LEMs were all designed and built by Grumman Aircraft Engineering Corporation of New York. Even though no designs or blueprints still exist for LEMs or CSMs here is a NASA diagram of a LEM:
The LEMs had an exterior measurement of about 12 foot by 12 foot (360cmX360cm) according to NASA, with a crew compartment of about 6 foot by 6 foot by 6 foot (180cmX180cmX180cm). Due to lower gravity on the Moon it had an effective weight of about 3 tons on the Lunar surface. For the descent stage, there is the reverse-thrust rocket that allegedly allowed the craft to make a soft landing on the Moon. And then for the ascent stage a powerful rocket propels the top half of the LEM into lunar orbit. The LEM would then dock with the CSM that NASA state was orbiting the Moon at about 4,000 MPH.
Photograph of a LEM allegedly on the Lunar surface released by NASA.
NASA claimed there was no room for seats in the LEMs, but never indicated where the astronauts slept during their time on the Moon’s surface.
Close up of photograph serial number AS11-40-5922 released by NASA.
9. The Lunar Roving Vehicle:
The Lunar Roving Vehicle (LRV) or Lunar Rover was a battery-powered four-wheeled rover used on the Moon in the last three missions of the American Apollo Missions ( 15,16 and 17) during 1971 and 1972. It was popularly known as the Moon Buggy.It was a fragile looking, open-space vehicle about 10 feet long with large mesh wheels, antenna appendages, tool caddies and cameras. Powered by two 36-volt batteries, it had four one-fourth hp drive motors, one for each wheel.The LRV was transported to the Moon on the Lunar Explorer Modules (LEMs) and, once unpacked on the surface, could carry one or two astronauts, their equipment, and lunar samples. According to NASA the three LRVs remain on the Moon.
LRV from Apollo 15 mission allegedly photographed on the Moon in 1971. Notice there are boot prints but no tyre tracks – did the LRV float in to this position? NASA photo serial number As15-88-11901
The first cost-plus-incentive-fee contract to Boeing was for $19,000,000 ( about $150,000,000 in 2013 US Dollars) and called for delivery of the first LRV by 1 April 1971. Cost overruns, however, led to a final cost of $38,000,000, ( about $300,000,000 in 2013 US Dollars)which was about the same as NASA’s original estimate. When questioned how the LRVs could fit in the LEMs NASA claimed that they folded in to the size of a suitcase.
The LRV could only be being unpacked in this photograph as NASA didn’t re-pack any LRVs as they were all allegedly left on the Moon. Apart from the mystery tyre tracks NASA must use some big suitcases.
NASA are planning a manned trip to the Moon in the 2020s or 2030s. They have released photographs of their prototype Lunar Rovers which will be radiation and meteoroid proof.
NASA prototype Lunar Rover for future manned Moon trips. Not as cool as the 1960s/1970s version but much safer from radiation and meteoroids.
Here is a video of the Lunar Rover on the alleged Apollo 16 mission:
Here is another good Lunar Rover video:
10.The Lunar Explorer Module Landing Sites:
The Lunar Explorer Modules (LEM) were the part of the Apollo missions that detached from the Command Service Modules (CSM)and descended to the Moon’s surface. Due to lower gravity on the Moon it had an effective weight of about 3 tons on the Lunar surface. For the descent stage, there is the reverse-thrust rocket that allegedly allowed the craft to make a soft landing on the Moon.
NASA photograph of a LEM allegedly on the Moon’s surface. As can be clearly seen no dust has been displaced by the reverse-thrust rockets which were allegedly used.
The reverse-thrust rocket system would have created a crater under the LEM landing site, and would probably have turned the dust in to a glass-like substance. In the photograph below you can’t see so much as a single grain of ‘lunar soil’ settled onto the lunar modules while they were setting down.
Another NASA photograph of a LEM allegedly on the Moon’s surface. It can again be clearly seen no dust has been displaced by the reverse-thrust rockets which were allegedly used.
11. Evidence Of Studio Lighting On Apollo Mission Photographs:
NASA has repeatedly stated that there was no artificial lighting used on the Apollo Moon landings and the only light source for videos and photographs is the Sun. However a careful study of numerous Apollo photographs would seem to indicate the use of studio lighting suggesting the “landings” were filmed and photographed in a film studio.
In one shot (AS14-64-9089) studio-lighting representing the sun is seen reflecting off a black background, a photographic effect that couldn’t happen in the blackness of space, and could only reflect off a background
In this Apollo 12 photograph there appears to be the reflection of what can only be an overhead studio light.
This Apollo 12 photograph (AS12-49-7278) shows two lens flares from overhead lighting.
The angles of the shadows in this Apollo 14 photograph (AS14-68-9486) indicate a light source just to the left of the photograph. This can’t be the Sun and can only be an artificial light.
12. The Fake Moon Rocks:
On their return from the alleged Apollo 11 Moon landing Buzz Aldrin, Neil Armstrong and Michael Collins toured together giving “Moon rocks” to grateful countries around the World. Altogether NASA gave over 100 countries “Moon rocks”
A “Moon rock” that turned out to be petrified wood when tested by scientists. How radioactive would a real rock from the Moon be?
Whenever they have been tested these alleged “Moon rocks” have turned out to be fakes. Here is an article from the British mainstream media about a fake “Moon rock” :
One other point is that surely a genuine rock brought from the surface of the Moon would have been highly radioactive, and far too dangerous for public display.
13.Laser Reflectors Left On The Moon:
One piece of evidence NASA repeatedly quote is that they left laser reflectors on the Moon which are still there. NASA claim that they can prove the laser reflectors are on the Moon because they can bounce lasers off them to measure the distance from the Earth to the Moon.
Laser reflector that NASA claims it left on the Moon.
According to NASA the fact that observatories to this day bounce lasers off the alleged reflectors proves that the Apollo missions succeeded. It is perfectly obvious though that the targets, if there, could have been placed robotically – most likely by the Soviets. It is also possible that there are no laser targets on the Moon. In December 1966, National Geographic reported that scientists at MIT had been achieving essentially the same result for four years by bouncing a laser off the surface of the Moon. The New York Times added that the Soviets had been doing the same thing since at least 1963, possibly as early as 1962 or even 1961.
You might have used one of the laser room measurers that most hardware / DIY shops carry nowadays. They manage to measure the size of rooms by bouncing a laser off opposite walls without any laser reflector.
14.Onboard Computer System:
NASA claim that the onboard computer for the Apollo Missions had a memory capacity of about 72 kilobytes – that is less powerful than most modern digital watches. NASA have never clarified whether this computer was on the Command Service Module (orbiting the Moon at 4,000 miles per hour) or either part of the two-part Lunar Exploration Module. Therefore either the CSM or the LEM had no onboard computer.
1960s computers were total crap. Maybe that’s why NASA only shared one between the CSM and LEM.
The most complicated aspect of the Apollo missions was the landing of the lunar modules, which made the software program controlling that part of the mission the most difficult to design. Amazingly though, that aspect of the software design was not assigned until after most of the other programmes were 2/3 complete – and it was assigned to a twenty-two-year-old gent named Don Isles who had just recently started his very first job. According to Moon Machines, “the programme without which it would be impossible to land on the Moon … had been written almost as an afterthought by a junior engineer.”
15. Mission Control In Houston Texas:
All the Apollo missions were allegedly controlled by Mission Control at the Johnson Space Centre in Houston, Texas.
Mission Control in Houston, Texas looked very impressive. However it was totally fake.
Mission Control looked like the cutting edge of 1960s technology at the time. However it has now been revealed that the staff were simply store clerks hired to pretend to be NASA scientists. A 2005 documentary entitled First on the Moon: The Untold Story, showed that Mission Control at the Johnson Space Center in Houston, Texas “was not as high-tech as it looked.” In reality, as Apollo 11 computer engineer Jack Garman tells us, “the computer screens that we looked at in Mission Control weren’t computer screens at all. They were televisions. All the letters, or characters, [they] were all hand drawn. I don’t necessarily mean with a brush, but I mean they were painted on a slide.” Jack Garman was allegedly the member of the Apollo 11 ground-crew who cleared the Eagle to land despite the fact that multiple alarms were going off.
16. NASA Claims Photos Proved The Moon Landings Happened:
NASA launched the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) on June 18th 2009 to photograph and map the Moon to find safe landing sites for Moon landings. NASA claims to have taken photographs of the Apollo 11 landing site and the bottom half of the LEM which didn’t return. Here are the photos that allegedly prove the Apollo missions to the Moon took place.
I can’t see anything from 500 metres up – maybe if we got closer.
As you can see from 500 metres above the Moon there is no visible sign of the bottom half of the LEM from the Apollo 11 mission.
NASA claim that these photos from 200 metres up clearly show the Apollo 11 landing site and the bottom half of the LEM.
17. Lack Of Stars:
One argument for the Apollo Moon landings being hoaxed is the total lack of stars in any of the photographic/video evidence. There are no clouds on the Moon, so stars are perpetually visible and significantly brighter than what we see through the filter of Earth’s atmosphere.
Did NASA realise it impossible to map out the exact locations of all the stars for the hoax without being rumbled, and therefore left them out? Intentionally falling back on an excuse that the quality of the photographs washes them out (an excuse they did actually give).
Some photographs are high-quality, however, and yet still no stars are shown. Certainly eerie, considering you can take pictures of stars from Earth in much lower quality and still see them.
Here is a video of Patrick Moore asking the Apollo 11 astronauts whether they could see stars from the Moon:
18. Faked Moon Walks:
Over the years there have been some serious questions raised about the film of Astronauts allegedly walking on the Moon. NASA claims the original Apollo footage has been lost but copies of it recorded by TV stations at the time are still available. One of the main criticisms is that with one sixth gravity the Astronauts don’t seem to be able to jump very high and when speeded up their jumps seem very Earthly. Also if you look how the dust is thrown up it also seems very similar to Earth which it obviously shouldn’t be.
Here is one video out of many showing these flaws in the footage:
19. Stanley Kubrick And Front Screen Projection:
Stanley Kubrick (July 26, 1928 – March 7, 1999) was a jewish American film director, screenwriter, producer, cinematographer and editor who did much of his work in the United Kingdom. Stanley Kubrick is regarded as one of the greatest and most influential directors of all time. His films are noted for their unique cinematography, attention to detail in the service of realism, and the evocative use of music.
Stanley Kubrick in 1971.
What is Front Screen Projection?
Kubrick did not invent the process but there is no doubt that he perfected it.Front Screen Projection is a cinematic device that allows scenes to be projected behind the actors so that it appears, in the camera, as if the actors are moving around on the set provided by the Front Screen Projection.The process came into fruition when the 3M company invented a material called Scotchlite. This was a screen material that was made up of hundreds of thousands of tiny glass beads each about .4 millimeters wide. These beads were highly reflective. In the Front Screen Projection process the Scotchlite screen would be placed at the back of the soundstage. The plane of the camera lens and the Scotchlite screen had to be exactly 90 degrees apart. A projector would project the scene onto the Scotchlite screen through a mirror and the light would go through a beam splitter, which would pass the light into the camera. An actor would stand in front of the Scotchlite screen, and he would appear to be inside the projection.
How “Front Screen Projection” works.
In Kubrick’s film 2001: A Space Odyssey Kubrick uses “Front Screen Projection” in several scenes.
Scene from Kubrick’s film 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968) using the “Front Screen Projection” technique.
The same scene with a line showing the set and the background Scotchlite Front Projection Screen.
In the example above of “Front Screen Projection” the part under the line is a stage set and the part above is a screen. Looking at the Apollo Mission photos below the same technique seems to have been used.
A still photograph from the Apollo 17 Mission.
The same photo from Apollo 17 with a line showing where the back of the set looks to be.
Another photo from Apollo Mission 17.
The same photo from Apollo Mission 17 with a line indicating where the set seems to end and the Scotchlite Front Projection Screen begins.
Here is an extensive study of Apollo imagery by photo analyst Jack White BA:
In 2005 NASA started their Constellation Programme (abbreviated CxP) to put men back on the Moon. They originally planned to get a man on the Moon by 2028 ( over three times longer than in the 1960s ) but soon pushed that date back to 2035.
On June 24, 2005, NASA made this rather remarkable admission: “NASA’s Vision for Space Exploration calls for a return to the Moon as preparation for even longer journeys to Mars and beyond. But there’s a potential showstopper: radiation. Space beyond low-Earth orbit is awash with intense radiation from the Sun and from deep galactic sources such as supernovas … Finding a good shield is important.” The Russians have calculated that to protect their cosmonauts from radiation a 4 foot (120cm) thick lead casing would be needed.
In 2010 the Constellation Programme was put on the back-burner, due to insurmountable technical problems, after around $50 billion had been spent on it. NASA could have obviously used the 1960s Apollo designs if they hadn’t all been lost.
If NASA Did Fake The Moon Landings: Why? Where? How? Who?
Why? If NASA did fake the Moon landings the obvious reason is that after John F Kennedy stated that America would put a man on the Moon before the end of the 1960s America couldn’t really back down. They would probably not have realised before about 1963 that it was impossible, and by then they had gone through 10s of billions of Dollars of taxpayers money. The loss of prestige, both at home and abroad, could have even brought down the American military/industrial complex and the American elite.
Where? If NASA did fake the Moon landings then the fake footage could have been shot at many locations, and probably more than one. NASA had its own recreations of the Moon surface and such places as Area 51, Lauren Canyon in Hollywood or even the set of Space Odyssey: 2001 could all have easily been used.
How? Faking the Moon landings would have been a lot easier than actually making the Moon landings. Everything the public saw on Earth would have been real apart from the Astronauts would have left the Saturn V rocket secretly before take off. The empty Saturn V rocket would have blasted off empty and fallen back to Earth, while NASA reported that the CSM and LEM were on their way to the Moon. After that all NASA had to do was bounce the fake transmissions off the Moon back to Earth. For the return “splashdown” they could have simply dropped the CSM from a helicopter or transport plane.
Who? The favourite suggestion for who directed the Apollo footage, if it was fake, is obviously Stanley Kubrick who made several references to the Apollo Missions in his other films. Another intriguing possibility is that director Roman Polanski was either involved or knew too much and a lot of his troubles, including the murder of Sharon Tate, are linked to the Apollo Missions.
JEWISH SUPREMACISM MY AWAKENING TO THE JEWISH QUESTION
By Dr David Duke
Dr Duke was previously elected to the House of Representatives, State of Louisiana, USA and served from 1996-2000 A book review by Boadicea
The powers that be will not be kind to those who tell certain truths; one could face loss of career, reputation-assassination, even face persecution … and maybe prosecution. And yet, some have the courage and compassion to tell those truths.
With honour and bravery, Dr Duke tells the truth in this volume and in so doing makes great personal sacrifice.
He speaks out for the good of mankind.
‘Jewish supremacism you say? What are you some kind of ‘racist’ hater anti-Semite who wants to kill six million Jews with pesticide gas?’ Some readers of this review may wonder if the author Dr Duke is such a person for writing a book with this title. However, last time you heard the newsreaders spitting about the latest so-called ‘racism’#/’white supremacist’ scandal, perhaps some white person had said something deemed to be ‘racist’ or a black person felt offended, did you imagine that the outraged journalist was a hater who wants to kill millions of white people? Did the journalist make sure to inform the audience that not all white people are so-called ‘racists’ and some are very ‘nice’? It is very likely that the reader has heard the venom directed at those labelled as ‘white supremacists’ and not imagined that the relevant enraged journalists are haters. Why are so many people trained to respond in such ways? Has the media and the education system, even society at large, trained certain responses to the word ‘supremacism’ in some contexts, but not in others? How could this be? Why can people spit about ‘white supremacists’ without any blame on the speaker, but to even mention the phrase ‘Jewish supremacists’ invites accusations of being a hater, a ‘racist’ – if not a genocidal maniac? What happened to ‘equality’?#
In contrast to the many pages of newspapers, academic journals, books, etc. written upon ‘white supremacism’, Dr Duke felt the need to make clear at the outset of his book that he does not hate all Jewish people# – in fact, Dr Duke dedicates his book to a Jewish man: the late Dr Israel Shahak#. Dr Duke did not start off with the beliefs he now holds, and his journey of awakening is told as part of this volume, a journey of discovery that took him from the official beliefs and narratives, to truth.
In this book Dr Duke discusses the issue of Jewish supremacism. Amongst Jews there are many who are brought up to believe that they are superior and have the right to reign supreme over their ‘inferiors’. These supremacist beliefs are found in the very texts held as holy by the Jews, (e.g. see Talmud, Torah, etc.). Such beliefs are found in the books and speeches made by some Jews. Such beliefs can be seen to be evidenced in much behaviour around the world.
Dr Duke quotes the definition of Jewish supremacism as: ‘The belief, theory or doctrine that the Jewish people are superior to all others and should retain control in all relationships’ and in his book presents evidence that many of the Jews of the world do believe themselves superior to all other peoples, e.g. citing Israel’s first Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion stating the ‘moral and intellectual superiority’ of the Jewish people#. One could imagine the reaction were a white leader to say such a thing in relation to white people! He also shows that they seek control in all relationships with other peoples, yet the Jewish-dominated world media shield Jewish supremacism from criticism (or even discussion), e.g. no outrage was expressed when Ben-Gurion was quoted in Look Magazine (1962) predicting Israel to one day be sitting atop a one world government:
‘In Jerusalem, the United Nations (a truly United Nations) will build a Shrine to the Prophets to serve the federated union of all continents: this will be the Supreme Court of Mankind.’#
While the world hunts down suspected Nazis, little outcry was heard when boastful terrorist Menachem Begin was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize – Begin who brags in his book about the massacre of over two hundred men, women and children at Deir Yassin. Dr Duke argues that Jewish supremacists seek to control the nations in which they dwell – making particular efforts to dominate the two most critical factors of power in the modern world: mass media and government.
Dr Duke evidences Jewish supremacism with many quotations from Jews, e.g.
‘If a Jew needs a liver, can you take the liver of an innocent non-Jew passing by to save him? The Torah would probably permit that, Jewish life has infinite value,’ he explained, ‘There is something infinitely more holy and unique about Jewish life than non-Jewish life’
If another group is considered so lowly, then this fact alone might cause them to be exploited by supremacists for the supremacists’ own gain. However, add to this feeling of supremacy a different moral code, one that does not resemble the typical Western code, but in fact views the Westerners as the eternal enemy even, with exploitation mandated, and the exploitation is inevitable. And yet this is hidden, even the acceptance of being a different race is frequently a matter of deceit#, and the holy texts are deliberately mistranslated for the non-Jews’ ears. Jewish supremacists consider themselves supreme, and desire the control and supremacy – this is a danger to people of the world. Dr Duke aims to speak out and protect all peoples of the world.
As Dr Duke starts to write this book he sits in the beautiful nature of the Rocky Mountains. As he enjoys the sunny scenery he thinks of the battle of nature. Beneath the tranquillity of the bubbling stream and the trees casting their dancing shadows in the breeze he thinks of the competition between the parts of nature; a competition of which this idyllic scenery is resultant – a competition that continues as he watches. Two ants spot a tasty piece of peach on the ground – but who will get to eat it? Are they from different ‘tribes’ that will go to ‘war’ for the food? The birds of prey soar in the sky with grace, but on the watch for a small furry animal too slow or careless to escape their sights – which mouse will be caught? Are some breeds of mice faster, smarter, more devious, better camouflaged? And hence better able to survive as a group?
Competition within groups, between groups, between species, all the losses and the selection has led to the beauty before Dr Duke at this moment. Within the ground countless rivalries between bacteria lie, even the stream itself wears away at the mountain over the years. And what of people? Who gets to survive and pass on their genes within a group? Which groups will render which other groups extinct? Will some groups finish off others – directly or indirectly? Will some groups interbreed with others to end the uniqueness of the original groups#? Even if they survive, will some groups be successful in life? Some groups be rich and healthy and powerful? What if group A viewed the other groups with contempt and desired to enslave them – could they do it? What of all the other groups were no competition, but one other group was splendid and their very existence perceived as a threat and a humiliation/insult to group A? What of this splendid group (B) were more beautiful, more creative, more honourable, more physically-capable, braver, nobler, more magical and very intelligent? Would group A not have a better chance of success without this group B? Group A could then just rule supreme over the other groups with no strong competition – be supreme and also hold supremacy. This could from a part of an evolutionary strategy. And with the use of language and power structures of the world, could power be exerted to attain these goals by means other than direct force? Could control be exercised in such manner so as to be largely invisible?
As a group, Jewish people hold great power around the world. The modern media exercises control over what information people have, and also determines their opinions and feelings. By, inter alia, repeated linking and imagery, certain phenomena are associated with the required images, beliefs and responses – perception and conception are both controlled. And yet, the mainstream media is largely controlled by Jews. This fact is acknowledged by some Jews themselves: across Moment Magazine’s front cover was proclaimed ‘Jews Run Hollywood, So What?’
The accompanying article inside was written by Jewish film critic Michael Medved, in which he writes:
‘Jewish writers and directors employ unquestionably flattering depictions of Jews for audiences that react with sympathy and affection.’
Marlon Brando – a beautiful and talented white man brought to his knees
The control of information and feelings/responses/images must be maintained – Marlon Brando serves as a good example of straying from the acceptable lines of thought. Although in his early career he behaved as desired, later he learnt truths that contradicted his early beliefs. On the Larry King show, Brando stated that: ‘Hollywood is run by Jews. It is owned by Jews.’ and commentated on the image-management: that while other groups are slandered, Jews ‘are ever so careful to ensure that there is never and negative image of the kike.’ A predictable onslaught against Brando ensued, only abating when Brando arranged an audience with Rabbi Hier of the Simon Wiesenthal Centre – Brando literally got on his knees to the Jew and kissed his hands, begging for forgiveness. Brando was absolved and did not speak such truths again.
In real life it was not like in this movie – in real life Brando was on his knees kissing the Jew’s hand
Duke lists the Jewish ownership and control of the world’s largest media concerns, including: Disney, Warner Brothers, Paramount (Viacom), Universal (NBC Universal), 20th Century Fox (News Corp), Dreamworks, and Columbia (Sony). For example, NBC News President is Neal Shapiro, Jeff Zucker is NBC Universal Group President, David Zaslov NBC Cable President, Rick Kaplan is MSNBC president – all Jews. The extremely influential MTV is run by Jews (Redstone), and has immense effect on young people in developing their attitudes and desires. And the Oscars themselves form a news item – these run by Jews and a means by which they can give their own, and those supporting their interests, credibility and coverage (and other matters, such as money, influence and power). It is not only news programmes and films that are under Jewish control, but all media, including publishing, e.g. Time Magazine, the most widely-read such publication, being headed by Jewish CEO Gerald Levin.
Controlling the media controls people in a very complete manner. What would one think were we to be at war with a nation, say during a war with Iran, if all major news sources and entertainment media were controlled and owned by Iranians? Would one have any suspicion that perhaps they are not being totally unbiased in all matters? Could they be distorting our perceptions, beliefs, feelings? Perhaps censoring certain information and maybe distorting other parts? Yet one needs to look into who owns and controls the media – if one does so, one will find it is almost entirely Jewish. Did your media tell you that the mass murderer Dr Harold Shipman was Jewish – or was that fact censored?
With control of media many truths can be hidden, and many emotions controlled.
Hidden truths include the Jewish nature of the genocide in Russia of the Russian Revolution.
As Winston Churchill stated:
‘There is no need to exaggerate the part played in the creation of Bolshevism and in the actual bringing about of the Russian Revolution by these international and for the most part atheistical Jews…’
Who knew that of the 384 ‘Russian’ commissars more than 300 were Jews? And only 13 were ethnic Russians? Who knew that Trotsky was Jewish and his real name Lev Bronstein? Did your media or education system tell you about a British government report stating:
‘There is now definite evidence that Bolshevism is an international movement controlled by Jews.’
Millions died and there was untold suffering of whites in Russia – does it make Dr Duke an anti-Semite to accept the historical fact that the ‘Russian Revolution’ was not actually Russian but a takeover of Czarist Russia by an antagonistic, non-Russian nationality?
Other historical events are distorted in their presentation – who knew that the slave trade was not run by whites, but mainly by Jews? And why is the narrative of the ‘Holocaust’ protected by law in many countries – historians imprisoned for questioning certain aspects of this official narrative – is any other historical narrative not allowed to be investigated or discussed by academics? Why just this narrative? Who benefits form this narrative? Who loses?
More recent events are also presented in a dishonest manner and with an agenda that suits Jewish supremacism – all this aided and abetted by Jews in the media, education system and government. Did you know that Israel attacked the American Navy intelligence ship Liberty on June the 8th 1967#?
‘Israel purposely and deliberately attacked the U.S.S. Liberty’ (Dean Rusk the US Secretary of State at the time).
Liberty was an intelligence ship sailing off the Egyptian town of El Arish, a town recently captured by Israeli forces. Israel knew that the Liberty was monitoring its transmissions and might learn of preparations for a planned invasion of Syria. Also, Liberty has intercepted Israeli radio communications showing that they had murdered hundreds of unarmed Egyptian prisoners of war in the Sinai. After Israeli jets attacked the Liberty with rockets, cannon fire and napalm bombs, in violation of international law Israeli torpedo boats even machine-gunned the Liberty’s deployed life rafts.
31 Americans were killed and 171 wounded in the attack – but, although designed to sink the ship and kill the whole crew, there were survivors who reported the whole incident – including how the crew waved a the pilots – pilots so close that the American crew could see their faces. Israeli torpedo boats came close enough to machine gun Americans tending the wounded on deck. There was no mistake that this was an American ship – evidence includes that of the then U.S. ambassador to Lebanon who heard US-intercepted Israeli communications with the attacking Israeli fighters acknowledging that the ship was American. The Liberty’s commanding officer, Captain William McGonagle, was wounded but survived. Awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor, unusually the relevant citations did not even identify Israel as the attacker. The US Navy conducted a perfunctory court of enquiry (lasting only 4 days) and failed to call even one Israeli to testify.
If the levels of control over the media and the government are not already clear – please note that President Lyndon Johnson ordered fighter support to be called back during the incident – caring more about his relations with Israel than saving American lives.
People can protest – but to whom does one go when the government is involved?
In Dr Duke’s book the evidence is presented in relation to the supreme power being exercised over others by Jews, e.g.: the wars in the Middle East, (e.g. Iraq); the false portrayal of events both recent and historic; the distortion of societies by degrading the people and spreading degeneracy, (e.g. Jews control pornography#, ‘progressivism’, feminism, etc.); and flooding the nations with foreigners to disrupt, demean, harm – and ultimately to facilitate the exercise of power (including by genocide). Who is largely behind the desire to flood other countries with foreigners?
Who promotes race-mixing? Who controls the puppet black civil rights leaders – did you know a Jew (Stanley Levinson) wrote many of the Martin Luther King’s speeches – and also that MLK was not a saint, but a woman-beater and a communist? If Jews were the only immigrant group in the West they would stand out more and also have less leverage – but being one in a mosaic acts to their advantage in a number of ways. In fact, with so much difference, many Jews can pass as whites to many (camouflaged and differences obscured and confused). However, in private and amongst themselves the separateness and supremacy over whites is strongly held – non-Jews deceived as to Jews’ true beliefs. In their own words they make clear their Jewish supremacism, and also their lack of fraternity to non-Jews, and their lack of loyalty to Western countries, e.g.
‘Like thousands of other typical Jewish kids …I was reared as Jewish nationalist, even quasi-supremacist… I attended Jewish summer camp…I saluted a foreign flag…and was taught that Israel was the true homeland…I was taught the superiority of my people to the gentiles’#
Divide and conquer protects the Jews as parasites in other countries, and also facilitates their supremacist agenda by other means. Dr Duke does not merely make such claims, but cites the evidence, e.g. Jewish writer Dr Stephen Steinlight bluntly states:
‘For perhaps another generation, an optimistic forecast, the Jewish community is thus in a position where it will be able to divide and conquer and enter into selective coalitions that support our agenda’
Supremacism in government, in the media and control over hearts and minds through other means such as the education system facilitates this supremacist agenda – all detailed by Dr Duke in this book. And why? Well, the desire for supremacy and the belief in supremacy is detailed as rooted in the very texts – again, all largely hidden from the non-Jews. Who knew that the Jewish term for a Gentile (non-Jew) woman is ‘Shiska’ which means ‘whore’? Who knew that the Talmud states that ‘only Jews are human. [Gentiles] are animals.’?
And yet, the information in Dr Duke’s book is largely unknown. By control of the information and also by silencing dissenters, the Jews have kept all this secret from most non-Jews. If anyone dares to tell the truth, then they are demonised as ‘anti-Semitic’ or ‘racist’ (or worse!).
In some countries, dissenters are imprisoned for questioning the official narrative of the six million# – upon which much sympathy, psychological pressure, power and money rests (not to mention the land of Palestine). And yet, if one were to take an honest view of history, one can see that the Jews have not been welcomed throughout history – this is not some new and unfounded irrational hatred, ‘anti-Semitism’ or ‘racism’.
The exploitation of others by Jews has caused Jews to be expelled from country after country across the world and across time – including King Edward expelling them from England in 1290 (which was revoked by Cromwell in 1657, over 360 years later, in exchange for money):
SOME EXPULSIONS OF JEWS FROM PARTS OF EUROPE AND RUSSIA
Mainz, 1012 Upper Bavaria, 1442 Naples, 1533
France, 1182 Netherlands, 1444 Italy, 1540
Upper Bavaria, 1276 Brandenburg, 1446 Naples, 1541
England, 1290 Mainz, 1462 Prague, 1541
France, 1306 Mainz, 1483 Genoa, 15550
France, 1322 Warsaw, 1483 Bavaria, 1551
Saxony, 1349 Spain, 1492 Prague, 1557
Hungary, 1360 Italy, 1492 Papal States, 1569
Belgium, 1370 Lithuania, 1495 Hungary, 1582
Slovakia, 1380 Portugal, 1496 Hamburg, 1649
France, 1394 Naples, 1496 Vienna, 1669
Austria, 1420 Navarre, 1498 Slovakia, 1744
Lyons, 1420 Nuremberg, 1498 Moravia, 1744
Cologne, 1424 Brandenburg, 1510 Bohemia, 1744
Mainz, 1438 Prussia, 1510 Moscow, 1891
The fact that this group believes that they are to rule and control others makes them unpopular. The hunger for power and the fact they have no loyalty to their host nation/indigenous people contributes to behaviours that make them unwanted – behaviours including acts of sabotage, treason, spying, enslavement of others, criminal behaviour, deceit as to their true desires and beliefs (amongst other matters), etc. As a cohesive group there are many advantages to be had, especially in a country that is racially mixed and in which others are taught not to have any group cohesion – these advantages are numerous, including those in finance that result from cohesiveness and the relevant knowledge, (e.g. insider trading). Control of money and banking has always been used as a means to control indigenous people – and is run by guess who.
The history of Jews as ruthless money collectors is largely rooted in their lack of compassion for the indigenous people from whom they extract the money, disdain for non-Jews also being a contributory factor. A group of immigrants taught they are supreme, seeking supremacy with little or no compassion or respect for the host nation/people, a group ruthless in their pursuit of gain for their own group, and hiding the truth from their victims – how could such tendencies make such a group popular with its victims? Are the repeated expulsions of this group really all acts of irrational anti-Semitism as we are led to believe by our government, education system and media?
It can be dangerous to tell the truth – but Dr Duke does in this volume. He not only tells the truth, he documents his statements with evidence, evidence largely from Jewish people themselves. Duke speaks out against the greatest threat to mankind: Jewish supremacism.
In closing this volume, Dr Duke calls for others to speak the truth for the sake of mankind:
‘As long as I have breath and ability, I will not be silent. I will endeavour to fight for European Americans, Palestinians and indeed, for the fundamental human rights of all peoples of the earth. Together, we must bravely face and fight the evil spectre of Jewish supremacism. The time is late, but we have a super-weapon in the struggle for freedom: the sword of truth. I beseech you; don’t let the truth lay silent, use your courage to give it voice. Let the sword of truth light the way to your freedom.’
Dr Duke’s book is recommended reading and is published by:
Free Speech Press. Manderville, LA: USA (2007)
Jewish Supremacism is available from booksellers in hardback or in pdf version, e.g. from Amazon:
The Unite Against Fascism are an establishment-financed group who intimidate, bully, threaten to kill, rob and assault anyone (particularly those from the White working-class) who dares to object to multiculturalism and/or Globalisation. Not only do you get beaten, robbed, assaulted and threatened you also get smeared as a fascist.
Here is a detailed description of the UAF and their backers both political and financial:
Because of the violent and corrupt nature of the UAF this blog is organising a campaign to have them proscribed as a terrorist organisation, and for the British Government to facilitate the seizure of their assets and those of their backers, to distribute to their victims. If you can help please copy and paste the following letter to your MP, MEPs and any members of the House of Lords you can think of on the website (whose address is at the bottom of this article).
Dear (name of MP, MEP, Lord or Lady)
I am writing to you regarding having the so-called “Unite Against Fascism” Group proscribed as a terrorist organisation under the Terrorism Act 2000. The UAF intimidate, bully, threaten to kill, rob and assault those (particularly from the White working-class) who dare to object to multiculturalism and Globalisation. Not only do you get beaten, robbed, assaulted and threatened you also get smeared as a fascist. A number of people have been unable to stand as candidates and/or leaflet and canvass for elections across Britain because of the violence and threats of violence this group are involved directly in, or have incited. Please visit the link below for an example of their behaviour and total disregard for British law, democracy and freedom. The old man receiving the public punishment beating is a candidate for a Parliamentary constituency seat:
The Terrorism Act 2000 clearly defines what terrorism is:
(1) In this Act “terrorism” means the use or threat of action where-
(a) the action falls within subsection (2)
(b) the use or threat is designed to influence the Government or to intimidate the public or a section of the public, and
(c) the use or threat is made for the purpose of advancing a political, religious, racial or ideological cause.
(2) Action falls within this subsection if it-
(a) involves serious violence against the person
(b) involves serious damage to property
(c) endangers a person’s life, other than that of the person committing the action,
(d) creates a serious risk to the health or safety of the public or a section of the public, or
(e) is designed seriously to interfere with or seriously to disrupt an electronic system.
(3) the use or threat of action falling within subsection (2) which involves the use of firearms or explosives is terrorism whether or not subsection (1) (b) is satisfied.
The UAF are quite clearly a terrorist organisation under the Terrorism Act 2000 and should be proscribed as such by the Home Office as soon as possible. The Government should also facilitate the seizure of the UAF’s assets and those of their backers to compensate the UAF’s many victims.
I would expect you to back this campaign and contact the Home Office immediately.
Yours sincerely ( Add your name )
Please send to your MP, MEP and Member of House of Lords at the link below:
On 9th April 2014 a BNP “Stop Paedophile Rings” banner protest was taking place on the East Lancashire Road in Greater Manchester, England. At about 8:00 AM this banners was safely secured with professional attachments above the East Lancashire Road in Greater Manchester by BNP activists.
BNP “Stop Paedophile Rings” banner hangs between two commercial signs above the East Lancashire Road in Greater Manchester.The banners are secured with professional attachments before being swung over to the outside.
The banner was warmly supported by the majority of the public with only a few obscene hand gestures by multiculturalists. At around 8:45 AM a Police Officer approached the demonstration. The Police Officer ( Collar Number 14953 ) was friendly enough but had been ordered by his Inspector to take the banner down, then confiscate it and take one demonstrator’s name and details under Section 5 Public Order Act. We’re not sure about his understanding of the legal position here regarding Electoral Law and the Public Order Act.
How offensive is a “Stop Paedophile Rings” banner? What sort of person would be offended enough to telephone the Police?
The Greater Manchester Police seizing this banner, which has been warmly supported around Greater Manchester, shows a few cracks appearing in the red Mafia of the Greater Manchester Police and the local Labour Party. There is a video of the confiscation by Greater Manchester Police here:
The confiscation of this banner led to the cancellation of a planned “Stop Paedophile Rings” demonstration outside Manchester Town Hall against Labour Party paedophile rings. Whether this was deliberate or coincidental is impossible to say.
The same banner at a previous banner drop flash demonstration in Tameside.
The Police Officer in charge of the election in Greater Manchester is Chief Superintendent O’Hare of Greater Manchester Police ( telephone 0161 872 5050) who had previously stated he wanted a good, clean election.
The BNP’s banner was confiscated for opposing paedophile rings but what if you complained that you are offended by this celebration of communism and genocide in Manchester?
These “Stop Paedohile Rings” campaign banners have been well received by tens of thousands of members of the Greater Manchester public. The banners are very good for bridge drop flash demonstrations, or for hanging or holding at other demonstrations. Each banner should also last several years/elections if looked after.
Section 5 Of The Public Order Act 1986:
(1)A person is guilty of an offence if he—
(a)uses threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, or disorderly behaviour, or
(b)displays any writing, sign or other visible representation which is threatening, abusive or insulting,within the hearing or sight of a person likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress thereby.
(2)An offence under this section may be committed in a public or a private place, except that no offence is committed where the words or behaviour are used, or the writing, sign or other visible representation is displayed, by a person inside a dwelling and the other person is also inside that or another dwelling.
(3)It is a defence for the accused to prove—
(a)that he had no reason to believe that there was any person within hearing or sight who was likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress, or
(b)that he was inside a dwelling and had no reason to believe that the words or behaviour used, or the writing, sign or other visible representation displayed, would be heard or seen by a person outside that or any other dwelling, or
(c)that his conduct was reasonable.
(4)A constable may arrest a person without warrant if—
(a)he engages in offensive conduct which a constable warns him to stop, and
(b)he engages in further offensive conduct immediately or shortly after the warning.
(5)In subsection (4) “offensive conduct” means conduct the constable reasonably suspects to constitute an offence under this section, and the conduct mentioned in paragraph (a) and the further conduct need not be of the same nature.
(6)A person guilty of an offence under this section is liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 3 on the standard scale.
BNP Rescue Banner 10th April 2014:
On April 10th 2014, Gary Tumulty (North West Regional Organiser) went to Swinton Police Station to demand the return of the “Stop Paedophile Rings” banner. Here is the video of what happened:
This is the book you need to read if you are new to ‘the Jewish question’!
THE TRUTH IS DANGEROUS
Today, if a book similar to this one were published in Europe, its author would be arrested and imprisoned. Their crime: simply questioning the so-called holocaust where six million Jews were allegedly exterminated during WW II.
Indeed, researchers have endured solitary confinement, brutal beatings by Jewish assailants, ongoing harassment, lengthy court battles, career suicide, and media attacks directed against their work – all because they presented a “revisionist history” of this pivotal event.
Other writers have been the victims of hate crimes, extensive smear campaigns, fines, death threats, and monetary rewards placed upon their heads after going into hiding.
The perpetrators behind these jack-booted Thought Police tactics are an entire holohoax industry devoted to suppressing factual data in favour of peddling heavy-handed doses of propaganda.
Despite these obvious dangers, The Holocaust Hoax Exposed dissects every element of what has become the 20th century’s most grotesque conspiracy. Covered in jarring detail is the mythology surrounding “concentration camps,” the truth about Zyklon B, Anne Frank’s fable, how the absurd “six million” figure has become a laughing stock, and the betrayal by maniacal Zionists of their own Jewish people that led to their deaths (via starvation and disease) after Allied bombings cut off supply lines to German work camps.
Yet, the only way an Israeli state could be created on stolen Palestinian land following WWII was through the most outlandish lies imaginable. Consequently, the holohoax industry has become a tyrannical dictatorship that incessantly manipulates, distorts, marginalises and manufactures false results to achieve their Machiavellian ends. By taking their hysterical obsessions to psychopathic levels, the charlatans behind this ruse make it glaringly apparent how weak their foundation is.
To compensate, these intellectually dishonest conmen (and women) continue to persecute revisionist historians all because they’re incapable of supporting their arguments through legitimate debate. The Holocaust Hoax Exposed is the final nail in a rotting coffin that has long been buried beneath a plethora of deceit.
It sure is a great demolition job of the Holohoax. In fact, this book makes such a mockery of the 20th century’s biggest lie that you will literally ‘laugh out loud’ or LOL at certain bits! Yep, a five year old could see through the Holohoax with just a little bit of study. That’s how badly constructed the Holohoax lie truly is!
I remember the first time I ever looked into the possibility of the Holocaust being a fabrication. It took me about 10 to 15 minutes to know that it was a load of shit. Then it took a few months for the enormity of the lie to truly sink in. Once it has sunk in you realise just how strong the Jewish death grip is over the mass-media and everything else for that matter!
The Blog of Ian Pace, pianist, musicologist, political animal. A place for thoughts, reflections, links, both trivial and not so trivial. Main website is at http://www.ianpace.com . Contact e-mail email@example.com.