Jump to content

The homosexual elite and the velvet mafia


Golden Retriever
 Share

Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, RobSS said:

 

I think you're only guess thrown in with a bit of wishful thinking. Look at what happened in Hampstead. That was just boys!

 

Regarding the word "gay", language evolves...  quite naturally.

 

 

 

 

If you want to start a thread about SRA and satanists I would be happy to join in.

 

But leave this thread without it. Second time of asking

 

@Macnamara

Edited by Golden Retriever
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, EnigmaticWorld said:

 

Not it isn't. There are people that are clearly trying to destroy birth rates and the nuclear family.

 

I don't doubt there's a divide and conquer agenda - but there are many gay people who enjoy a very happy family life and haven't fallen for the tactic, which you're only helping by sowing disharmony and by only looking at the surface of things.

 

Regarding birth rates, as I've mentioned already, I don't think our primary purpose on this planet is to breed and Jesus Christ never procreated so it's not a big deal.  The earth is rather over populated in many places anyway, so may be nature is also involved? 

 

 

Edited by RobSS
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Truthspoon said:

 

https://www.truthspoon.com/p/the-first-degree-of-satanism-is-belief.html

 

Many homosexual men likewise reported sexual abuse at an early age and one can immediately state as self-evident that anyone who is an abuser of male children is automatically homosexual as well as being a paedophile of course. Incidents of child abuse involving men and minors statistically lean very heavily towards the abuse of male children, therefore we can technically include the majority of paedophile sexual abuse within the context of homosexuality.


This position becomes even clearer to me when we consider the work of homosexual lobbies themselves in trying to get the age of consent lowered. Peter Tatchell went infamously on record in 1997 in a letter to the Guardian stating that ‘several of my friends gay and straight, male and female had sex with adults from the ages of nine to thirteen. None of them feel they were abused. All say it was their conscious choice and gave them great joy.”


Of course, he went on to ‘clarify’ his comments on his own website, probably pursuant to an investigation by the vice squad and under legal advice, saying ‘I have never advocated the lowering of the age of consent.’ When in fact it was he who indeed succeeded in lowering the age of consent from 18 to the present 16.


According to website Whopkinsnews.com, Tatchell contrinuted to a chapter in a book entitled BOY or The Betrayal of Youth, compiled by PIE or the Paedophile Information Exchange, an organization which existed during the 70’s, likely some kind of strange fusion between Marxist subversion and 60’s ‘free love’ getting a bit carried away.


Tatchell wrote chapter 9 of the book entitled ‘Questioning ages of minority and ages of consent.’ Within the same book are chapters on incest and how to make paedophilia socially acceptable.


Several questions ought to immediately materialize in response to this. First of all why did Peter Tatchell as a child have so many friends who were having sex with adults? Did he perhaps, at an early age, move within the circle of paedophile rings? Was he, like his friends, all children or victims in common of some kind of network, the same type of which he would find himself involved in in later life. This somewhat makes me think of how Milo Yiannopoulos recounted to Joe Rogan that at the Hollywood parties he attended he would often see young children being given drugs and having sexual relations with older men. Yiannopoulos is a gay man, proudly so, yet if he as a gay man negotiating the gay scene can find himself rubbing shoulders with the drugging and abuse of young children then how close and how unsavoury bedfellows are homosexuals with paedophiles?


The second question which Tatchell’s letter ought to inspire, focusses on the phrase, ‘None of them feel they were abused.” These comments remind me of Yiannopoulos being ‘grateful’ to the Orthodox priest who abused him and apparently taught him how to give good blowjobs. These are two examples of rationalization. To a strong ego, nobody wants to feel that one had been a victim, or been abused, so one can just redefine the abuse and call it a formative homosexual experience and this seems to be more than a recurring trend, it seems to be the operating principles of homosexuality itself.


In 2016 Milo quite inexplicably took part in a pro-Trump art installation against globalization in which he bathed in a bathtub of pig’s blood. This is a pretty strange thing to want to do. Bathing in baked-beans for charity I can just about get my head around. It is the strangeness of using blood in art and protest which immediately assails most people as strange, unpleasant and no doubt extremely unhygienic. Milo has been on record claiming that he is ethnically Jewish. Lady Gaga also seems to have a penchant for blood as does Jewish Spirit Cooking artist Marina Abromovich. Abromovich is a common Ashkenazi Jewish surname since it a Patronym for Jewish people meaning ‘of Abraham’. So we have Milo bathing in pig’s blood, Lady Gaga with her hotel bathtub full of blood and Marina Abromovich.


The Guardian has played a highly dubious role in giving paedophilia advocacy the oxygen of publicity and one might wonder why. Why is there an editorial policy at the Guardian to champion paedophilia as a kind of human rights issue? It is very disturbing and signals perhaps, the slow bursting open of the egg of Marxist socialism which was kept cool during the 80’s under the onslaught of Thatcher, the right-wing press and the shambolic state of the Labour party, only to slowly crack open during the warming political climate of the mid to late 90’s onwards when the Labour beast finally started to emerge. That beast would be no better personified that in the guise of a man like Peter Mandelson. A man who seems to bridge the gap and may help us solve the mystery of what lies between, or what connects the Labour party and paedophilia. It seems to me that the Labour party and the paedophilia and homosexual rights groups, are different facets of some submerged, hidden and unknown, ‘other’ organization. But what could that organization be? This is another question for another time.

 

I've meant to start a thread on Alfred Kinsey for years.

 

From your site ...............



"Dr Alfred Kinsey, an ethnic Jew, who was well known as being responsible for the Western sexual revolution, was a paedophile pervert who would sexually stimulate infants to observe their sexual response. Alfred Kinsey was an atheist, which makes sense when you consider he spent his life sexually molesting children, that probably wouldn’t sit comfortably with the idea that there is a God or a part of the cosmos which is observing your actions and will hold you accountable. I suspect this is the case with a lot of atheists. They simply live immoral, evil or selfish lives, or have something within them which will not suffer the idea of being observed or judged by any eye but their own, a dirty secret perhaps, the wish to hide and remain in shadow. And so they deny the existence of God because the idea would put a crimp on their lifestyle choices."

 

https://www.truthspoon.com/p/the-first-degree-of-satanism-is-belief.html

 

Alfred Kinsey | Estudios sobre la sexualidad humana

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Golden Retriever
  • Thanks 1
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Golden Retriever said:

 

If you want to start a thread about SRA and Satanists I would be happy to join in.

 

But leave this thread without it. Second time of asking

 

 

Fine, but I don't see what you're making all the fuss about. It's true that there are a lot of gay men in elite positions of entertainment and politics, but not everyone is gay and even taking into account that the proportion is high, so what?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, RobSS said:

 

Fine, but I don't see what you're making all the fuss about. It's true that there are a lot of gay men in elite positions of entertainment and politics, but not everyone is gay and even taking into account that the proportion is high, so what?

 

 

What are you talking about?

 

Twice you have mentioned SRA, satanic ritual abuse on this thread about homosexuality.

 

If you want to discuss SRA and homosexuals, then make your own thread about it.

Edited by Golden Retriever
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, RobSS said:

which you're only helping by sewing disharmony and by only looking at the surface of things.

 

Why would I do that when I'm related to bi people, and have a gay friend that I give business to? Do you think I want them to come to harm, or any gay people for that matter? Obviously I don't.

 

There is a difference between noticing an agenda and hating individuals.

 

As you know, I think immigration has been weaponized, but does talking about it mean I hate non-Europeans, especially the ones in my family that are Indonesian and Filipino? No.

 

Shining a light on certain agendas doesn't mean you're sewing disharmony. If anything people are trying to protect social cohesion and harmony, or what little there is left of it anyway.

 

fns.jpg

Edited by EnigmaticWorld
  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Golden Retriever said:

 

What are you talking about?

 

Twice you have mentioned SRA, satanic ritual abuse on this thread about homosexuality.

 

If you want to discuss SRA and homosexuals, then make your own thread about it.

 

I didn't mention SRA in the post you replied to!

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, EnigmaticWorld said:

 

Why would I do that when I'm related to bi people, and have a gay friend that I give business to? Do you think I want them to come to harm, or any gay people for that matter? Obviously I don't.

 

There is a difference between noticing an agenda and hating individuals.

 

As you know, I think immigration has been weaponized, but does talking about it mean I hate non-Europeans, especially the ones in my family that are Indonesian and Filipino? No.

 

Shining a light on certain agendas doesn't mean you're sewing disharmony. If anything people are trying to protect social cohesion and harmony, or what little there is left of it anyway.

 

fns.jpg

 

Its not gays that break up families, it's prejudice, intolerance and those that want to control the sexuality of others for their selfish desire.

 

 

Edited by RobSS
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, RobSS said:

Its not gay that break up families, it's prejudice, intolerance and those that want to control the sexuality of others for their selfish desire.

 

Tell that to groomers on social media that are targeting children and turning them against traditional values. There's a reason why people often reply back to them with "okay, groomer", because they keep saying they're coming for our children.

 

Tolerance isn't a Christian virtue either, so don't use it against me as a weapon if you're going to preach Christianity all of the time. Tolerating grave evil within society is the evil, yet most western nations have been very tolerant.

 

“Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions.”

 

― G. K. Chesterton

 

Now before you start, I'm not saying individuals are evil, just people that are pushing certain agendas.

Edited by EnigmaticWorld
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, EnigmaticWorld said:

 

Tell that to groomers on social media that are targeting children and turning them against traditional values.

 

 

Groomers are criminals who can be either gay or straight. The point is that they are engaging in illegal and immoral activity. The label of what they are, gay or straight, is totally irrelevant!

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, RobSS said:

 

Groomers are criminals who can be either gay or straight. The point is that they are engaging in illegal and immoral activity. The label of what they are, gay or straight, is totally irrelevant!

 

 

 

Yes, but people are talking about a very specific agenda from a certain type of groomer. Nice deflection as always though. 🙄

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, EnigmaticWorld said:

 

Yes, but people are talking about a very specific agenda from a certain type of groomer.

 

 

What agenda is that? Surely all groomers are bad, irrelevant of what gender they are?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, RobSS said:

 

What agenda is that? Surely all groomers are bad, irrelevant of what gender they are?

 

 

 

Of course all groomers are bad, but this isn't about all groomers.

 

2 minutes ago, RobSS said:

What agenda is that?

 

Oh FFS, I'm done with your stupidity. If you can't see the poison, you never will. Just going to ignore you now.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, EnigmaticWorld said:

 

Of course all groomers are bad, but this isn't about all groomers.

 

 

Oh FFS, I'm done with your stupidity. If you can't see the poison, you never will. Just going to ignore you now.

 

When you get abusive, you undermine your argument.

 

The poison is not gays or straights, it's the act of abusing a child that's poisonous and evil. It's so obvious, I don't see why you don't get it. No need for me to get rude with you though.

 

 

Edited by RobSS
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, RobSS said:

The poison is not gays or straights

 

I didn't say it was. I clearly said individuals are not the problem. It's cultural marxist arseholes that want to destroy the fabric of society.

 

Sorry for being rude. I will ask you politely to not respond to me instead, and I will return the favour by not responding to you.

 

Peace.

Edited by EnigmaticWorld
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, EnigmaticWorld said:

 

I didn't say it was. I clearly said individuals are not the problem. It's cultural marxist arseholes that want to destroy the fabric of society.

 

Sorry for being rude. I will ask you politely to not respond to me instead, and I will return the favour by not responding to you.

 

Peace.

 

Why can't you just have a reasonable discussion instead of blotting things out? What's marxism got to do with this discussion? All kinds of totalitarian regimes are bad, and I'm sure you get groomers in fascist regimes also! You're totally not seeing the wood for the trees. The crime is child abuse, not what views a person has or what gender they are - not in a free society, anyway!

 

 

Edited by RobSS
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, EnigmaticWorld said:

I know I'm getting angry when I start making typos. So it's probably better if we both part ways.

 

If you can't handle debate, it's probably best not to get involved in the discussion, but I'm happy to reason things out.

 

It's typical of a totalitarian society where people won't listen, people just walk round with cloth ears. Fortunately, we British fought the Nazis and this is still a free country despite Boris's worst efforts..

 

Edited by RobSS
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, RobSS said:

 

If you can't handle debate, it's probably best not to get involved in the discussion, but I'm happy to reason things out.

 

It's typical of a totalitarian society where people won't listen.

 

 

I can handle debate, I'm just concerned that I don't have free speech on my side, and I don't want to say too much about who is behind this shit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, EnigmaticWorld said:

 

I can handle debate, I'm just concerned that I don't have free speech on my side, and I don't want to say too much about who is behind this shit.

 

 

That's an interesting new thought from you in this... Mac has the courage to say and so does David Icke. I'm also not lacking in courage to speak out.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, EnigmaticWorld said:

 

Yeah, where did the brother wars and simping for Churchill get us? We're now being destroyed.

 

No more brother wars!

 

We're not being destroyed. There is still a long way to go before this crisis plays out, but we are not being destroyed, and we will never be destroyed.

Psalm 23

A psalm of David.

The Lord is my shepherd, I lack nothing.
    He makes me lie down in green pastures,
he leads me beside quiet waters,
    he refreshes my soul.
He guides me along the right paths
    for his name’s sake.
Even though I walk
    through the darkest valley,[a]
I will fear no evil,
    for you are with me;
your rod and your staff,
    they comfort me.

You prepare a table before me
    in the presence of my enemies.
You anoint my head with oil;
    my cup overflows.
Surely your goodness and love will follow me
    all the days of my life,
and I will dwell in the house of the Lord
    forever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...