Campion

I have come across that belief especially in Eastern and New Age circles, but I would like to dig a little deeper. Two questions come to mind: who gave us these beliefs, and who benefits from our depopulation? Unless you have personal experience of the afterlife, the chances are that you've picked up the ideas from someone else, and as we all know, everyone has some form of agenda and bias. And very few people declare their conflicts of interest when trying to sell you something, even selling you ideas. Think about it, if the people pushing these anti-life ideas practiced what they preached, they themselves would have died out centuries ago and wouldn't be around to persuade us to stop having children. If we die out and they survive, then they inherit what we had.

Agreed, we do have plenty of coal reserves and modern tech is cleaner at burning fuels like coal and domestic waste eg plastic and car tyres. Antarctica's natural resources has been a secret kept from the public's ears for a long time, at least until the elite decide the time is right to exploit it, no doubt with some highly crafted international conflict thrown in for good measure.

But we don't have our own uranium mines in the UK so how is this any more homegrown than importing fossil fuels? Also the way which British govts welcome foreign investors and companies to operate our energy infrastructure doesn't fill me with confidence. Although more diversification of power generation isn't a bad thing.

It all seems part of the agenda to sexualise innocent children's entertainment, including this retrospective woke-ing of old characters like Velma and even Dumbledore. Especially white western characters.

White extinction rebellion anyone?

One taboo I wish they would break is their own secrecy and lies, which of course being hypocrites they don't - imagine the holiness that would result if they did own up to the truth! No doubt inconsistencies like this go over their heads, as self-reflection and contemplation are not in their training manual.

Bedsits in my vocabulary. I used to hear about Pakistanis lending money for houses within their extended families and close-knit community, perhaps this was before sharia banking was available here. At least it avoided paying interest to corporate banks and the inherent risks of money lending mitigated by peer pressure within the community.

yeah, but then where would he stash all his billions which he helped himself to when he was cleaning up those corrupt oligarch sharks, that had such a feeding frenzy during the Yeltsin days?

and at the same time, isn't the Israeli economy dependent on Palestinians for cheap unskilled labour? Many do manual work such as farm labouring which the Israelis don't want to do. Looks to me like they've got a problem both ways: whether they succeed or fail at driving the Palestinians away.

The property market has imo been broken and suffering from market failure for many years with a huge mismatch between the number of homes (especially decent sized family homes) and population. Continuous immigration and population increase among minority groups is an unstoppable force meeting the immovable object of limited space for building (England has the 4th highest population density in the world according to my calculation). People have to live somewhere, it's a necessity of life so the usual rules of free market supply & demand don't really apply and bubbles/crashes become the norm. It's also a way of controlling the population, the ptb can decide where to grant planning permission and for what types of housing - eg where I live there are few suburban family homes being built and many high-rise flats which the ordinary person has little chance of getting freehold ownership with the extra freedoms therein. " You will own nothing and be happy." I heard a different version of this of all places in a Star Trek episode (original version): "They will be controlled and happy" referring to a planet of people controlled by a super-intelligence and no free will of their own.

Excellent info thanks Mac. A couple of points to add from what I've picked up on this. The Ottomans ensured that their culture wouldn't be diluted by the import of foreign soldiers and workers by a couple of means. Either they converted the kidnapped western children to Islam and made sure they and their descendants were Muslims indistinguishable from the local population (hint: is there a 'Western European' identity within Turkey and Egypt and other middle Eastern societies today, which is fighting for equality and social justice equivalent to what is happening in the West? Or, if they couldn't be converted to Islamic culture, the male slaves were simply castrated to prevent them having children of their own culture. Women in those days were not as capable of transmitting their ancestral culture if forced to marry locals. At least in Islam as far as I know - it's different in Judaism which has a matrilineal aspect. In western Europe and in modern times however we have no such protection for the indigenous peoples (as an aside, I'm interested in how we are told to use different names for the protected minority races: it's BAME in Europe but BIPOC in the USA, indicating the different slants which the neo-progressives use in their critical theories). My second thought is around the William of Orange history. During his reign, Scotland was a separate country with its own imperial ambitions, and their own Templar & Masonic history. It was the failure of their colonies such as Novia Scotia and Panama which crashed their economy and led them being bailed out by the Unionists and agreement to join the UK. That also in time ended the local territorial wars between Scotland and England, unifying the armed forces which were thus more effective at creating the "British" empire abroad. Bringing all this together as you have, I'm in agreement that we shouldn't consider it as a British empire at all but rename it as something like the Masonic empire or Illuminati empire. The whole UK concept, like the EU, is an Illuminati/Masonic/Templar controlled project at its top level. Not that the separate countries of England and Scotland were free of their influence too of course. Note - I'm using 'Illuminati' in a generic way to denote a conspiratorial international secret society with its claws into the top echelons of many countries. You're being more specific with names like sabbatarians etc.

the same globalist network that britain Yes, we are all occupied lands in western Europe, and writing in forums like this sometimes feels like prisoners scratching messages on their cell walls for each other. Virtually of course, rather than literally.

And this war is started after our economies were already weakened by various unnecessary crises such as the credit crunch of 2008 and the covid pandemic. The timing could hardly have been better to create maximum disruption.

Just thinking out loud here, doing some dot connecting. So here in the UK we deliberately shut down our own domestic coal industry in the 80s & 90s, when we still had hundreds of years' reserves, and made ourselves dependent on foreign gas (also a fossil fuel so not for environmental reasons). Now that supply is shut off in a war stoked up by the military powers on both sides. Perhaps it doesn't matter so much who is sabotaging the pipelines, if this is all part of a bigger and longer-term picture where your enemies are not who you thought they were.

But the article says it was the slave owners who enslaved them, not the govt. It was the govt who ended that enslavement, so what should they apologise for? My guess is that they (ie the British workers) had to bribe the owners otherwise the law wouldn't have got passed and the slaves freed. We weren't a democratic country back then after all. Whoa ... 180 years to pay off 40% of govt income, and they owe more than that now don't they? It's almost as if the country is deliberately being kept in a state of perpetual endebtedness. I wonder why; to benefit the bankers, to parasitise and demoralise us and our future leaders? Rather as if physical slavery of Africans was replaced by financial slavery of us all, black and white together. And all the while we believe we are free.

But of course if govts can do this then why bother borrowing when you can just create your own money? As long as inflation is within your acceptable limit.

Thanks. I understand the basic idea of gilts where the govt borrows money from the private markets at a fixed interest rate (or coupon) - rather like a company's bonds but 'gilt-edged' because govt IOUs are supposed to be safer. The gov then has that cash to spend on whatever it likes (govts rarely invest money for the future). They then redeem the debt at the end of the term out of current year's income, ie tax or more borrowing. But in this case, it appears that the BoE is buying back the gilts early, putting the public money back into private hands sooner than expected because the capitalists in the markets were beginning to worry that perhaps the govt debt was not so secure as they thought, thus reducing the market value of the gilts and, as the saying goes, 'cash is king'. You're right that the BoE is acting as administrators because it's not really their £60 bn they're using to buy back the gilts. But where does it come from? Does the govt have a spare £60 bn sitting in its bank account; is it borrowing new money from elsewhere; or somehow printing money out of thin air? Goodness me, sometimes I wish we could go back to the old days, get rid of paper and electronic money and have cash actually made of gold, silver and copper.

If the data were truly accurate, I wonder who the greatest perpetrator of hate crimes against whites is. I suspect that Marxist anti-white whites are high up on the list.

US politics is still a bit of a mystery to me, but I'm struck with parallels to our (British) situation with the French, for decades now, allowing migrant camps in Calais where they make illegal and dangerous boat crossings (well, dangerous until they're picked up by the border force taxi service) when they could very easily pick them up and return them to whichever safe country they arrived from. There's a surface level of rivalry with the French about this, informed with centuries of battles between us; and yet the French also allow massive migration into their own land. So beneath the surface narrative the same plan is being carried out with all of western Europe following the same path to multi-racism.

I'm confused, does this mean the £60 bn is coming from private investors rather than the taxpayer?

Isn't that the same as what they called quantitative easing a few years back, aka printing money to prop up the economy?

I never believed it did, tho I don't have a supply of distilled water to drink anyway. Surely there's enough minerals in our food to make up for any lack in the water?

Another little bit of news, I saw an interview with Cardiologist Dr Aseem Malhotra on Dan Wootton's GB News show tonight. First time I'd seen him, but he comes across well. Also saw this article about him today which echoes his GB News piece: https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/aseem-malhotra-cardiologist-end-covid-vaccines-malone/ “There is a strong scientific, ethical, and moral case to be made that COVID-19 vaccines rollout must stop immediately until raw data has been released for fully independent scrutiny.” "Furthermore, real-world data reveal that in the non-elderly population, the number needed to vaccinate to prevent one death from COVID-19 runs into thousands and that re-analysis of randomized controlled trial data from the initial vaccine clinical trials suggests a greater risk of suffering a serious adverse event from the vaccine than to be hospitalized with COVID-19." “Conclusion: It cannot be said that the consent to receive these agents was fully informed, as is required ethically and legally. A pause and reappraisal of global vaccination policies for COVID-19 is long overdue.”

Another reference for this story, tho I don't know the reliability of USA news yet. However, it may help to have another source. https://ussanews.com/2022/09/24/bulletin-thousands-of-soldiers-deploying-on-streets-of-london/

Well why wouldn't they if the US is silly enough to welcome them in. A lot cheaper than keeping them in prison and having a proportion reoffending when they get out.