Jump to content

Campion

Members
  • Posts

    342
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Campion

  1. 18 hours ago, Nuckles said:

    What would you do with it?

     

    If you have any debts then I'd suggest paying them off first to extract the claws of the financiers out of you. 

     

    After that, if you're not financially educated I'd recommend seeing a good qualified, independent financial adviser who isn't on commission. Because a lot depends on your personal circumstances and a good adviser takes it all into account to decide what's suitable for you. 

     

    Failing that, take your time educating yourself about investing, tax, meditate on your values and life plans, and make your choices informed ones.  

    • Like 1
  2. "Children Ruin Everything" 

     https://www.imdb.com/title/tt10738442/

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Children_Ruin_Everything

     

    This is a Canadian series which I haven't seen over here yet, and I hope I never do. Funnily enough it bucks the trend of showing young families as mixed race, instead it's a white couple having mixed feelings about being parents. 

     

    ' Smeaton described the series as inspired by his understanding that parenting "is time-consuming and expensive and frustrating. So I wanted to create a show that acknowledged that but also showed the other side, which is having a family is worth it.” '

     

    So why call the series 'Children ruin everything"? instead of something positive like "Children are worth it". 

     

     

    proxy-image.jpeg

    • Haha 1
  3. As time goes by, it's becoming clearer that the conspiracy is taking off the mask, becoming more open with its actions, and more obvious to anyone with an open mind and access to relatively uncensored news. When we can see what's happening in full view before us, it's easier to decide what to do about it. I find that less depressing, and even energising, compared to not really knowing what's going on and feeling powerless to contribute to a solution. 

     

    • Like 2
  4. 2 hours ago, BMarley said:

    Cathars preached depop to all their followers, those others practicing celibacy did it for other (nefarious) reasons.  

     

    I've read that Cathars were dualists and, as Mac said, believed the material half of the duality represented evil. Would you care to elaborate on the nefarious reasons, that's piqued my interest!  

      

    2 hours ago, BMarley said:

    I care about humanity as a whole, not just some melanin deficient subgroup.

     

    Others have pipped me to it, but our melanin levels are appropriate to our climate (and there's variations within Europe too) so I don't see what you're getting at. Nowadays with vitamin D added to food and supplements available, deficiency is avoidable anyway. Naturally I also care about all humans, also other animals and plants, but this subject is whether depopulation is a good thing. Native demographic decline in Europe is not a good thing imo, and I would argue is being promoted by numerous policies. I care about decline of other racial groups elsewhere too, if I know about it, but I'm talking about my own community and civilisation here so I make no apologies for prioritising it. 

    • Like 1
  5. On 10/7/2022 at 5:52 PM, Macnamara said:

    the 'perfecti' of the cathars used to shun sex in order to ensure they did not bring anymore life into what they saw as a fallen material world

      

    So they were dependent on recruiting members from the outside society (ie Roman Catholics) so perhaps it's not surprising they were unpopular and had a backlash. 

      Also didn't the Templar Knights have to practice celibacy (in the form of not getting married at least) and donate their land and wealth to the order upon initiation? So they gave their undivided loyalty to the order.  And the RC church also had celibate priests & monastics, but in those days the country as a whole had a high birth rate and families could 'afford' to lose one member to a celibate order like the church or the Templars, preferably not the oldest son who would inherit the family's wealth, so it wasn't a cause of depopulation. 

    Times are very different now, some racial groups like white Europeans are already depopulating without these spiritual-style beliefs (ps that's my conflict of interest here, I don't want native Europeans to die out). 

    • Like 1
  6. On 10/7/2022 at 2:10 AM, johnkim said:

    Hear me out…

     

    for those who are familiar with the belief that we live in a soul trap and get recycled back to earth over and over.

     

    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. 

    • Thanks 1
  7. 17 hours ago, sock muppet said:

    But we do have about 300 to 600 years supply of coal approx, but don't quote me on that there's a rather large margin of error in there but i'm confident the true answer lies between, which is plenty of time to go and rape Antarctica and demolish a pristine environment which will keep the evil shitheads happy.

     

    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. 

    • Like 2
  8. 36 minutes ago, Macnamara said:

    a radical expansion of homegrown energy

     

    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. 

    • Like 1
  9. 2 hours ago, Tinfoil Hat said:

    Do they have to corrupt every, single thing! LEAVE SCOOBY ALONE! 

     

     

    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. 

    • Like 2
  10. 5 hours ago, Macnamara said:

    the sabbateans believe in a process of taboo breaking to achieve 'holiness through sin' which leads to all of the perversions we hear about

     

    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. 

    • Like 1
  11. 2 hours ago, Grumpy Owl said:

    smaller self-contained flats (or "studios" to use estate-agent marketing-speak).

     

    Bedsits in my vocabulary. 

     

    2 hours ago, Grumpy Owl said:

    or as I have observed in certain parts of Birmingham, Pakistani Muslims with their extended families.

     

    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. 

  12. 19 hours ago, EnigmaticWorld said:

    Anglo-Saxons? /s

    Jokes aside, it would be kind of based if Putin grew a spine and said Normans and the money lenders. 

     

    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? 😜 

     

    • Like 1
  13. 13 hours ago, Velma said:

    This is yet another brutal terror tactic, aside from shooting young men daily, to intimidate and demoralize the population, in order to make them leave.

     

    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. 

  14. 1 hour ago, Grumpy Owl said:

    The danger for them is that if homeowners start to sell their properties - in order to downsize, or rent - because the mortgage repayments are becoming unaffordable, this is what will lead to house prices decreasing, with buyers desperate to sell, and thus the 'property market bubble' bursts.

      

    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. 

    • Like 1
  15. 11 hours ago, Macnamara said:

    The sabbateans 'triangular trade'

     


     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. 

    • Like 1
  16. 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. 

    • Like 1
  17. On 9/28/2022 at 8:07 PM, Macnamara said:

    Not a single shilling of reparation, nor a single word of apology, has ever been granted by the British state to the people it enslaved, or their descendants. 

     

    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. 

     

    On 9/28/2022 at 8:07 PM, Macnamara said:

    Today, 1835 feels so long ago; so far away. But if you are a British taxpayer, what happened in that quiet room affects you directly. Your taxes were used to pay off the loan, and the payments only ended in 2015.

     

    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. 

    • Like 1
  18. 5 minutes ago, Campion said:

    or somehow printing money out of thin air?

      

    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.  

  19. 5 hours ago, zArk said:

    no, The Gov already has the £60n cash.

    In 10 years the investors have their money lump sum back, the UK taxpayer then pays the entire £60bn

    the investors recieve a regular payment for their money , which is the interest repayment the UK taxpayer makes

    the uk taxpayer becomes an undisclosed 3rd party to an investment contract.

     

    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. 

  20. On 9/25/2022 at 6:25 PM, Macnamara said:

     

    well its really the 'silly' half who voted democrat that have enabled this situation and many of them are neo-marxists who believe that america needs to disappear in order to create their world revolution. Some of those will understand the implications of that but many will find out too late what it all really means

     

    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. 

  21. 10 hours ago, zArk said:

     

    i think the BoE is acting as administrator while the actual purchase is to be made by 'investors' who then will throw the securitised asset back onto the market , broken up and packaged

     

    Its a confidence move. Instead of investors seeing 'GOV BOND' (they are hiding the asset, the gov debt, within a packing system that worked so well upto 2008) they only see 'long term assets' .its national bonds packaged up with mortgages and loans.

     

    what could go wrong?

     

    in my opinion this move will create paranoia for the traders in the long term at the very least

     

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

×
×
  • Create New...