Jump to content

The homosexual elite and the velvet mafia


Golden Retriever
 Share

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, RobSS said:

If someone or a group of people are committing a crime, it should be exposed and justice should be served. I think the term "mafia" is too strong a word. It's an emotive term designed to rile up the mindset or circle of people that like to find scapegoats and bogeymen for societies problems or even their own psychological problems. The closest thing I can think of that comes anywhere near to a gay mafia were the East End Cray twins, but even so, they were gangsters who happened to be gay. Being gay in itself isn't a crime and being gay didn't make the Cray twins who they became. It was their egos that created what they became.

 

were both the kray twins gay? I always thought it was just one of them?

 

so they were mixing in a bunch of circles for example celebrity circles too and i've heard it said that they were procuring things for powerful people but i don't know the specifics

 

The mafia are bound by a code of silence to protect what they call 'our thing' which is basically an understanding that they are part of a defined group that is looking out for each others interests at the expense of everyone elses

 

kinda like intersectionality....

Edited by Macnamara
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Macnamara said:

 

were both the kray twins gay? I always thought it was just one of them?

 

so they were mixing in a bunch of circles for example celebrity circles too and i've heard it said that they were procuring things for powerful people but i don't know the specifics

 

The mafia are basically bound by a code of silence to protect what they call 'our thing' which is basically an understanding that they are part of a defined group that is looking out for each others interests at the expense of everyone elses

 

kinda like intersectionality....

 

According to some reports I've read, the Kray twins had an incestuous gay sex with each other. I would say they were gangsters who happened to be gay. People don't refer to the American mafia as being the "heterosexual  mafia", so why call the Krays a "gay mafia", when they were engaged in so many aspects of criminal activity, from sex crimes to robbery, just like the mafia in America, who also operated brothels and sex trafficking. They're just known as the mafia, not the heterosexual mafia.

 

 

Edited by RobSS
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, RobSS said:

According to some reports I've read, the Kray twins had an incestuous gay sex with each other. I would say they were gangsters who happened to be gay. People don't refer to the American mafia as being the "heterosexual  mafia", so why call the Krays a "gay mafia", when they were engaged in so many aspects of criminal activities, just like the mafia in America, who also operated brothels and sex trafficking. They're just known as the mafia, not the heterosexual mafia.

 

well there are claims such as the following that they overlapped with the pedophile scene and the zionists: https://aanirfan.blogspot.com/2019/02/mi5-and-kray-twins.html

 

the connection between zionism and pedophilia are now well established with for example the mega group that were behind jeffrey epstein and the blackmail operations involving the bronfmans and roy cohn etc

 

as for the american mafia they were mostly jewish eg mickey cohen, bugsey seagal, meyer lansky and all the murder inc crew

 

its only hollywood that likes to depict the mafia as all italian but perhaps hollywood is run by the zionists who are trying to conceal that side of their operations....

 

so maybe the american mafia should really be called the 'jewish mafia' and the krays are said to have jewish ancestry

 

If the krays were involved with high level politicians and celebrities and had compromising intel on them that might constitute a security risk and an example of hidden influence

Edited by Macnamara
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Macnamara said:

 

well there are claims such as the following that they overlapped with the pedophile scene and the zionists: https://aanirfan.blogspot.com/2019/02/mi5-and-kray-twins.html

 

the connection between zionism and pedophilia are now well established with for example the mega group that were behind jeffrey epstein and the blackmail operations involving the bronfmans and roy cohn etc

 

as for the american mafia they were mostly jewish eg mickey cohen, bugsey seagal, meyer lansky and all the murder inc crew

 

its only hollywood that likes to depict the mafia as all italian but perhaps hollywood is run by the zionists....

 

so maybe the american mafia should really be called the 'jewish mafia' and the krays are said to have jewish ancestry

 

I don't understand the obsession with labels. Labels just distract from the real crime, which is paedophilia or sex trafficking or money laundering or political corruption or whatever it is. The fact is they were criminals who acted as a mafia. They acted within a group or circle, which may have overlapped with other criminal groups or circles. The label thing is just a distraction.

 

 

 

 

Edited by RobSS
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, EnigmaticWorld said:

 

Not always. A lack of labels or descriptions of the perps can also distract from the real crime, or the motivations for said crime.

 

But it's still the crime itself that's the issue. The label is secondary and it has nothing to do with other people who come under that label.

 

 

Edited by RobSS
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, RobSS said:

 

How? Please explain!

 

 

 

Well look at the demographics of knife crime for example, then look at the images they put out. Absolutely subversive. This is something that often happens too.

 

Can't be having truth or accurate descriptions, the snowflakes might start burning shit down or something. We must capitulate!

 

 

Do you not think it would help if people understood the backgrounds of our politicians, what they believe, and who their kids often marry etc? Do you not think people would understand their motivations more if they knew they're not regular white people like us? Labels often serve a purpose. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, EnigmaticWorld said:

 

Well look at the demographics of knife crime for example, then look at the images they put out. Absolutely subversive. This is something that often happens too.

 

Can't be having truth or accurate descriptions, the snowflakes might start burning shit down or something. We must capitulate!

 

 

Do you not think it would help if people understood the backgrounds of our politicians, what they believe, and who their kids often marry etc? Do you not think people would understand their motivations more if they knew they're not regular white people like us? Labels often serve a purpose. 

 

But it's still the crime itself that's the issue. The label is secondary and it has nothing to do with other people who come under that label who haven't committed the crimes.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, RobSS said:

But it's still the crime itself that's the issue. The label is secondary and it has nothing to do with other people who come under that label who haven't committed the crimes.

 

I think there's two issues. The individual crime, and the wider crime problem, and people won't understand the wider problems and agendas if they go soft and stop using the correct lexicon.

 

Nobody is saying it has anything to do with others who come under that label, but things should be accurately reported or described. How else do you wake people up?

 

gdfgdfg.jpg

 

^This.

Edited by EnigmaticWorld
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, RobSS said:

 

Good, that's the point I'm making.

 

 

 

I guess it depends what people mean when they say they don't like labels to be honest.

 

Obviously words designed to dehumanize a whole group are not good. Not saying I get outraged at every slur as I understand that a lot of people have some dark humour and like their banter, but I can understand the argument against that kind of language at least.

 

Some words are just regular terms and descriptions though, and people still take offense to some of them.

Edited by EnigmaticWorld
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, EnigmaticWorld said:

 

I guess it depends what people mean when they say they don't like labels to be honest.

 

Obviously words designed to dehumanize a whole group are not good. Not saying I get outraged at every slur as I understand that a lot of people have some dark humour and like their banter, but I can understand the argument against that kind of language at least.

 

Some words are just regular terms and desriptions though, and people still take offense to some of them.

 

It's not the labels that are the problem but how they're used, which is why it's always good to be clear when using labels that not everyone who comes under that label may be of the same mindset or agenda. David Icke does it a lot and it's really not difficult to be clear. The people who don't like to make it clear are people who like to scapegoat, and people who don't like the general group that that label represents, such as racists and homophobes, for example.

 

 

 

Edited by RobSS
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, RobSS said:

 

It's not the labels that are the problem but how they're used, which is why it's always good to be clear when using labels that not everyone who comes under that label may be of the same mindset or agenda. David Icke does it a lot and it's really not difficult to be clear. The people who don't like to make it clear are people who like to scapegoat, and people who don't like the general group that that label represents, such as racists and homophobes, for example.

 

But what is a racist? Years ago I would have said someone that hates people for things they have no control over, like skin colour. These days I don't even know, because I don't think people really give a damn about skin colour besides anti-whites.

People might be attracted to a certain look, but that's more a preference thing. Actual people that hate people for things like skin colour seem very difficult to find. People seem more concerned about behaviour and peoples actions. I don't think there are many racists, just race realists, or people that are racially conscious. Even a lot of white Nationalists would tell you that they support true diversity of peoples.

 

Not sure who coined the term either. It's rumoured to be Trotsky, but I never looked into it much.

 

'PACNCTOB', whose Latin transliteration is 'racistov', i.e., "racists".

 

And what is a homophobe? I struggled with a phobia most of my childhood, and teen years. I can't understand how somebody could have a phobia about gays though. Most people don't have a fear of homosexuals, or even attitudes that are very anti-homosexual, but I understand latter point was different years ago.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homophobia

'Coined by George Weinberg, a psychologist, in the 1960s'

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Weinberg_(psychologist)#Early_life

Edited by EnigmaticWorld
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, EnigmaticWorld said:

 

But what is a racist? Years ago I would have said someone that hates people for things they have no control over, like skin colour. These days I don't even know, because I don't think people really give a damn about skin colour besides anti-whites.

People might be attracted to a certain look, but that's more a preference thing. Actual people that hate people for things like skin colour seem very difficult to find. People seem more concerned about behaviour and peoples actions. I don't think there are many racists, just race realists, or people that are racially conscious. Even a lot of white Nationalists would tell you that they support true diversity of peoples.

 

Not sure who coined the term either. It's rumoured to be Trotsky, but I never looked into it much.

 

'PACNCTOB', whose Latin transliteration is 'racistov', i.e., "racists".

 

And what is a homophobe? I struggled with a phobia most of my childhood, and teen years. I can't understand how somebody could have a phobia about gays though. Most people don't have a fear of homosexuals, or even attitudes that are very anti-homosexual, but I understand latter point was different years ago.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homophobia

'Coined by George Weinberg, a psychologist, in the 1960s'

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Weinberg_(psychologist)#Early_life

 

An example of racism or sexism might be rejecting a person for a job because they are black or because they are gay, etc & etc. There are countless variations on that situation. It might be exclusion from a social group, it may involve name calling, or belittling a person, or even violently physically attacking another person just because of their skin colour or sexual orientation, etc.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, RobSS said:

An example of racism or sexism might be rejecting a person for a job because they are black or because they are gay, etc & etc. There are countless variations on that situation. It might be exclusion from a social group, it may involve name calling, or belittling a person, or even violently physically attacking another person just because of their skin colour or sexual orientation, etc.

 

can people be racist against white people?

 

for example if an asian person gives a job position to another asian person instead of a white person is that racism?

 

what if an industry is dominated by for example jews would that be racist?

 

what about if a black person doesn't have any white person in their social group. Are they a racist?

 

are bollywood movies that only have asian people in them racist?

 

is name calling white people 'gammon' racist?

 

is dismissing any concerns of white people by calling it 'white fragility' belittling them?

Edited by Macnamara
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Macnamara said:

 

can people be racist against white people?

 

for example if an asian person gives a job position to another asian person instead of a white person is that racism?

 

what if an industry is dominated by for example jews would that be racist?

 

what about if a black person doesn't have any white person in their social group. Are they a racist?

 

are bollywood movies that only have asian people in them racist?

 

is name calling white people 'gammon' racist?

 

is dismissing any concerns of white people by calling it 'white fragility' belittling them?

 

Racism can be discrimination by any one race against any other race, so yes, white people can experience racism and racism against white people should not be dismissed, and neither should racism against black people be dismissed because that exists too. It's possible for Indians to be racist against Chines or Japanese, or vice versa. The point is that racism does exist, just like sexism and homophobia also exists, and in a very wide of forms.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

there's a lot of talk of 'cultural appropriation' but is it ok to appropriate white culture?

 

if its not ok to appropriate white culture then the rest of the world should stop speaking english, stop driving on tarmac roads, pneumatic tyres and using internal combustion engines because all of those things came out of white culture

 

how come no one is ever told off for appropriating white culture?

 

the truth is that there is no equality of the rules here. Clearly the game here is to single out white people for different treatment with the ultimate aim of replacing them

 

how is that moral?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, RobSS said:

Racism can be discrimination by any one race against any other race, so yes, white people can experience racism and racism against white people should not be dismissed

 

But is it ever acknowledged or discussed?

 

the answer is NO

 

Why is that? If you ask a woke person (i have debated many online) they will likely tell you that white people are the demographic majority and therefore it is not possible to be racist against them as the majority is always the 'oppressor' and the minority is always, by default, the 'oppressed'

 

well i've got news for those people: they need to do some travelling because white people are a minority on this earth by a long shot so at what point in this process of replacing white people do the rules of the game change and those espousing anti-white hate start feeling the weight of the law in the same way that white people would now?

 

is it when white people become a demographic minority in this country? Who is then going to flick the switch at that point and ensure that white people get to have the 'oppressed' status? Exactly who is it that is going to safeguard them at that point from racism?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Macnamara said:

 

But is it ever acknowledged or discussed?

 

the answer is NO

 

Why is that? If you ask a woke person (i have debated many online) they will likely tell you that white people are the demographic majority and therefore it is not possible to be racist against them as the majority is always the 'oppressor' and the minority is always, by default, the 'oppressed'

 

well i've got news for those people: they need to do some travelling because white people are a minority on this earth by a long shot so at what point in this process of replacing white people do the rules of the game change and those espousing anti-white hate start feeling the weight of the law in the same way that white people would now?

 

is it when white people become a demographic minority in this country? Who is then going to flick the switch at that point and ensure that white people get to have the 'oppressed' status? Exactly who is it that is going to safeguard them at that point from racism?

 

I think you need to take this up with "woke" people and argue with them!

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, RobSS said:

I think you need to take this up with "woke" people and argue with them!

 

no at this moment i'm pulling you up for saying that racism is descriminating against someone because they are 'black'

 

do you honestly think that there aren't hispanic people, black people, chinese people, pakisthani people etc etc etc out there who don't descriminate against white people or say derogatory or stereotyping things about white people?

 

if you do then you aren't living in the real world

 

so if you are going to define racism then may i suggest that you don't single out any particular race and instead define it in a more universal way that applies to EVERYONE equally and not act as if its some burden that only black people have ever had to or will ever have to shoulder

Edited by Macnamara
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Macnamara said:

 

no at this moment i'm pulling you up for saying that racism is descriminating against someone because they are 'black'

 

 

 

You're tilting at windmills or you missed the post I made a short while ago where I already stated that white people can be discriminated against, just as white people can also discriminate against blacks, etc. It can go either way. So you do still need to find a "woke" person to argue this out with. See here:

 

 

Edited by RobSS
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, RobSS said:

You're tilting at windmills

 

i don't think you were even conscious of what you were doing in that post

 

well a lot of stuff is going to become conscious for a lot of people because the reality train is coming

 

too many people not seeing where the real problems are

Edited by Macnamara
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Macnamara said:

 

i don't think you were even conscious of what you were doing in that post

 

 

What do you mean by that? I meant exactly what I wrote! Anyone can be discriminated against, actually, but discrimination based on prejudice is always wrong, whether it's against blacks, whites, people with red hair, gays, lesbians short people, you name it, even social class discrimination. it's sad and it's immoral.

 

 

 

 

Edited by RobSS
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, RobSS said:

What do you mean by that? 

 

i mean what i said that there is an anti white bias out there in the world and its growing

 

and the reality is that it isn't white people per se that ARE the oppressors. Its a bloodline cult of occultists that are the problem but i don't look at a newspaper and hear university professors calling them out

 

no what i hear are things like this:

‘We gotta take these motherf**kers out’: Rutgers professor says white people ‘committed to being villains’

29 Oct, 2021 20:22
617c51102030271d9f537029.JPG
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Macnamara said:

 

i mean what i said that there is an anti white bias out there in the world and its growing

 

and the reality is that it isn't white people per se that ARE the oppressors. Its a bloodline cult of occultists that are the problem but i don't look at a newspaper and hear university professors calling them out

 

no what i hear are things like this:

‘We gotta take these motherf**kers out’: Rutgers professor says white people ‘committed to being villains’

29 Oct, 2021 20:22
617c51102030271d9f537029.JPG

 

Well, when I said that anyone can be discriminated against, I really meant it, and you're illustrating what I'm saying.

 

 

 

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...