Go Back   David Icke's Official Forums > Main Forums > Today's News > Politics / Elections

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 27-07-2016, 01:48 PM   #1
st jimmy
Senior Member
 
st jimmy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Amsterdam, Netherlands
Posts: 1,839
Likes: 1,282 (755 Posts)
Default Boycott 2016 elections

You cannot seriously consider voting for these scumbags; to compare them to lizards, would be an insult to lizards. Can anybody think of any other reason to vote for Clinton because you're against Trump, or vote for Trump because you despise Hillary? The charade is too obvious, they are really of the same party (the Rockefeller, Kissinger, Soros, CFR, elite party).
From the start it were only Hillary Rodham Clinton and Donald Trump in the spotlight, and because nobody will vote for any politician they don’t know, it’s the media that decides who wins. Just yesterday, July 26, Hillary accepted the official nomination, while a few days earlier Trump became the nominee for the Democrat-Republicans.
Only politicians with the support of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) can become president of the USA. The CFR takes their orders from Rockefeller, who could be seen as the King of the USA.
Bill Clinton is a member of both Bilderberg and CFR. Donald Trump isn’t an official member of CFR (yet), but had a good talk with the president of CFR in August 2015: http://www.infowars.com/donald-trump...richard-haass/
It’s hard to imagine that what is known about the Clintons is only the tip of the iceberg, while it’s clear that Trump is about as horrible. So boycott these elections, when they clearly take us for even bigger fools than we are, we should find better things to do than follow the lies from filth like Clinton, Trump, Soros and co.

The connection between Donald Trump and Rothschild agent George Soros (member of Bilderberg and CFR) is interesting: they were involved in a money laundering, bankruptcy fraud with the General Motors Building in New York City. George Soros has “warned” about Donald Trump, to give him additional media coverage and at the same time publicly supporting Hillary Clinton. Trump isn´t only connected to Soros and Kissinger but even to Hillary herself: https://aryanskynet.wordpress.com/20...os-connection/
Maybe it will be difficult for Trump to remember for which party he’s the nominee. Until 2008 Trump financed the Democratic Party for hundreds of thousands of dollars (including 10,800 for Hillary), he’s a golf buddy of Bill and such good friends of the Clintons they were at his (last) wedding: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-35066940
Hillary and Trump even use the same address to avoid taxes: https://hendersonlefthook.wordpress....-trust-center/
Trump wants to become friends with mass murderer Henry Kissinger (Rockefeller agent, former Secretary of State, cofounder of Bilderberg and supporter of communist China), Trump met Kissinger only a few months ago: http://www.blacklistednews.com/Donal...38/38/Y/M.html
To find all the dirt on Bill and Hillary Clinton you need more than 1 lifetime. Hillary is very close to mass murderer Kissinger: http://www.thenation.com/article/hen...war-and-peace/

Just take look at all the “accidental” deaths connected to Bill and Hillary (the Clinton body count). In all of these unfortunate cases - including a lot of suicides (some with more than 1 bullet!), robberies, and accidents – nobody (alive) has been able to prove their guilt. Here’s a list of some 100 suspicious deaths connected to the Clintons: http://whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO...#axzz48usfsXSQ
An important part of the history of the Clintons are the Whitewater and Castle Grande investments with Jim McDougal (who died in 1988 of a “heart attack”). Apparently when the Clintons make bad investments, others have to pay. Paying off an overdue loan by loaning more money is really clever: http://prorev.com/connex.htm
In spring 1978 Jim McDougal proposed to Bill and Hillary to invest together in real estate, Whitewater, to build houses that first would be rented as holiday homes and eventually sold. In 1979 the McDougals and Clintons loaned over 200,000 dollar, but the project failed.
By 1985 Jim McDougal worked on another project, Castle Grande, for which he needed 1.75 million dollar. He could only get this money with the help of Bill and Hillary. Seth Ward was used as a straw man to make the fraudulent transactions possible; Ward received over 300,000 dollars for his cooperation. Most of the money came from Madison Guaranty, where Jim McDougal called the shots. The legal affairs for Castle Grande and Madison Guaranty were handled by attorney Hillary Clinton from the Rose Law Firm. By 1989 the project Castle Grande was already in ruins, by which time the American government (read: tax payer) lost 4 million and when Madison Guaranty filed for bankruptcy, lost another 73 million dollar.
Vince Foster was a college of Hillary at the Rose Law Firm with intimate knowledge on the financial affairs of the Clintons. In July 1993 Foster was summoned to testify to Congress about the records Hillary had illegally destroyed, but was suicide before he got the chance. Documents of Foster were taken by Bernhard Nussbaum and given to Maggie Williams (assistant to Hillary Clinton). David Hale (friends with both Jim McDougal and Bill Clinton) testified in 1993 he was pressured by Bill Clinton as governor of Arkansas to illegally lend 300,000 dollar to Susan McDougal (wife of Jim). Susan McDougal was imprisoned for 18 months because she refused to testify against the Clintons, before being pardoned by President Bill Clinton.
The investigation into the Whitewater, Castle Grande scandals started in 1994, and led to sentences for 15 people, among which the follow up of Bill as governor of Arkansas, Jim G. Tucker. Bill and Hillary also committed tax fraud for thousands of dollars, but remained innocent. Governor Bill Clinton was also good friends with Dan Lasater, who employed his brother Roger, and made sure Lasater made a bundle in the new police communications system (what good are friends for, if you do not help them?).
In 1978 Hillary Clinton invested 1000 dollar in cattle futures, is it possible she made almost 100,000 dollar out of this?!

More on the Clintons can be found in the Bank of Credit and Commerce International (BBCI) scandal, were drug money was laundered: http://www.stewwebb.com/2015/01/05/b...auds-timeline/
Hillary Clinton of the Rose Law Firm was the first attorney to represent BCCI in 1978. BBCI was also involved with George W. Bush. Bush and the Clintons were also connected through the Iran Contra affair. A connection of George H.W. Bush, attorney Norman Phillip Brownstein, in turn served on the Board of Directors of Chubb Insurance Company who paid Bill Clinton’s legal fees in his impeachment proceeding and lawsuits. Remember that in the Monica Lewinsky affair Bill did everything he could to increase the chances for Bush junior in the coming presidential election?

Last edited by st jimmy; 27-07-2016 at 01:48 PM.
st jimmy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-07-2016, 02:52 PM   #2
roastpotatoes
Inactive
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 4,307
Likes: 5,429 (2,533 Posts)
Default

I'm not an American, but if there are any Independent Candidates with fair policies for the American people, not connected with Wall Street or the military industrial complex then vote for them.

Don't vote for Trump or Clinton.
roastpotatoes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-07-2016, 03:03 PM   #3
grandmasterp
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: The SkegVegas Coast
Posts: 31,797
Likes: 2,578 (1,691 Posts)
Default

So your answer is 'Don't Vote' St Jimmy.
Fair enough, nobody is compelled to vote, that's democracy.
Russell Brand took a similar view to you and then changed his mind.
People tend to make their own minds up about voting or not voting.
IMO all our Yank chums should now vote for Trump.
Just for LOLs.
Likes: (1)
grandmasterp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-07-2016, 03:04 PM   #4
vancity eagle
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 10,492
Likes: 4,415 (2,493 Posts)
Default

what would happen if a mass movement protested both these candidates ?

Call it the "No Hillary No Trump" movement.

What if they just mobbed all media offices. What happens if people refused to vote ?

If we exposed their "democracy" to be a scam, only then can there be change.

But they want us to participate by giving us a candidate who will play to our ears.

Anybody advocating to vote for Hillary or Trump is a shill.
vancity eagle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-07-2016, 03:12 PM   #5
grandmasterp
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: The SkegVegas Coast
Posts: 31,797
Likes: 2,578 (1,691 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by vancity eagle View Post
what would happen if a mass movement protested both these candidates ?

Call it the "No Hillary No Trump" movement.

What if they just mobbed all media offices. What happens if people refused to vote ?

If we exposed their "democracy" to be a scam, only then can there be change.

But they want us to participate by giving us a candidate who will play to our ears.

Anybody advocating to vote for Hillary or Trump is a shill.
Bit of a broad brush statement there mate.
You seem to be saying that everybody who is canvassing for the candidates in the POTUS election is a 'shill'.
How could you possibly know that?
Have you met them all?

Last edited by grandmasterp; 27-07-2016 at 03:13 PM.
grandmasterp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-07-2016, 04:05 PM   #6
alfredo79
Senior Member
 
alfredo79's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Italy
Posts: 3,121
Likes: 1,083 (678 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by grandmasterp View Post
Bit of a broad brush statement there mate.
You seem to be saying that everybody who is canvassing for the candidates in the POTUS election is a 'shill'.
How could you possibly know that?
Have you met them all?
And you? Do you know them personally?

However, I'm Italian and I don't vote except for referendum. If I were American, I would not go to vote. Abstension! Fuck off politics!
Likes: (1)
alfredo79 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-07-2016, 04:12 PM   #7
grandmasterp
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: The SkegVegas Coast
Posts: 31,797
Likes: 2,578 (1,691 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by alfredo79 View Post
And you? Do you know them personally?

However, I'm Italian and I don't vote except for referendum. If I were American, I would not go to vote. Abstension! Fuck off politics!
No mate, I don't know anyone who is currently canvassing for the next POTUS.
My point was that I suspect neither does our chum who reckons that they are all 'shills'.
Referendum voting is good isn't it?
We've just won a Brexit referendum here in Blighty.

As far as not voting in regular elections then that is up to the individual.
Claiming that ALL canvassers in the POTUS election are 'shills' though...
Nobody could know that for sure.

Last edited by grandmasterp; 27-07-2016 at 04:13 PM.
grandmasterp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-07-2016, 04:22 PM   #8
ramirez
Senior Member
 
ramirez's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 1,263
Likes: 886 (555 Posts)
Default

The only positive with Trump is he seems to not fancy picking a fight with Russia, but he could be full of shit total nuts to trust any of them, proofs in the pudding as they say and he defo likes the Clintons, so that is pantomime.
__________________
Space tripping, drifting away

Remember, the Rothchilds started Sci Fi and ET over a hundred years ago, even funding authors, so beware the fake ET talk, the real stuff is ok though

Last edited by ramirez; 27-07-2016 at 04:23 PM.
ramirez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-07-2016, 04:59 PM   #9
alfredo79
Senior Member
 
alfredo79's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Italy
Posts: 3,121
Likes: 1,083 (678 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by grandmasterp View Post
No mate, I don't know anyone who is currently canvassing for the next POTUS.
My point was that I suspect neither does our chum who reckons that they are all 'shills'.
Referendum voting is good isn't it?
We've just won a Brexit referendum here in Blighty.

As far as not voting in regular elections then that is up to the individual.
Claiming that ALL canvassers in the POTUS election are 'shills' though...
Nobody could know that for sure.
A referendum asks for a precise opinion about a thing. It's different.
Other elections require to vote bollocks full of money, who think about themselves and who funds them.
Likes: (2)
alfredo79 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-07-2016, 05:04 PM   #10
velma
Senior Member
 
velma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 5,668
Likes: 2,379 (753 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by vancity eagle View Post
what would happen if a mass movement protested both these candidates ?

Call it the "No Hillary No Trump" movement.

What if they just mobbed all media offices. What happens if people refused to vote ?

If we exposed their "democracy" to be a scam, only then can there be change.

But they want us to participate by giving us a candidate who will play to our ears.

Anybody advocating to vote for Hillary or Trump is a shill.
I noticed INFOWARS website has become the Trump (Punch) and Hillary (Judy) puppet show.

At least Alex Bullhorn Jones is taking this election seriously!
Likes: (2)
velma is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-07-2016, 10:20 AM   #11
grannie27
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 15,058
Likes: 2,638 (1,293 Posts)
Default

Vote for THIS Person then ......

__________________
Always Do Your Best. Your best is going to change from moment to moment; it will be different when you are healthy as opposed to sick. Under any circumstance, simply do your best, and you will avoid self-judgment, self-abuse and regret.
Don Miguel Ruiz
Likes: (1)
grannie27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-07-2016, 10:33 AM   #12
kizzie
Registered Users
 
kizzie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Hertfordshire UK
Posts: 5,486
Likes: 3,706 (1,805 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by grannie27 View Post
Vote for THIS Person then ......

Bernie thought by endorsing Clinton it was in the bag. But many are now pushing for Jill.
__________________
When you stop watching what they want you to watch you stop thinking what they want you to think.. Then you see a world that is nothing like they tell you it is.
kizzie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-07-2016, 10:38 AM   #13
guivre
Premier Subscribers
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 2,774
Likes: 455 (302 Posts)
Default

I always vote third party in the bigger elections. (President, governor, etc.) I always make sure I vote because of local referendums, judges, that kind of thing. If local races were on a different day that would be something else entirely.
Likes: (1)
guivre is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-07-2016, 01:02 PM   #14
st jimmy
Senior Member
 
st jimmy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Amsterdam, Netherlands
Posts: 1,839
Likes: 1,282 (755 Posts)
Default

I’m not only advocating - boycott the American elections. I’m saying don’t vote in other countries either. Especially when you're living in a Kingdom (like Britain or the Netherlands), or a colony of Britain (like Canada or Australia) where all politicians bow down to the dictator/King/Queen.
What they do in politrics is make us believe that when you vote for a different political party, things will change. And things will indeed change: the elite gets more and more over the backs of the poor, while it doesn’t matter for who you vote.

If you consider voting in the USA, the least you have to expect, is that they take the Federal Reserve back from the Zionist bankers that now control the American money supply.
According to the American constitution it’s the congress that has the power over the money supply, so the privately owned Federal Reserve is really in violation of the American constitution.

In Britain there isn’t even a constitution, while the constitution of the Netherlands makes the King the ruling dictator and the constitution of Canada makes it a colony under the reign of Queen Elizabeth.
I still have to see what happens with the glorious victory in the Brexit referendum. In the Netherlands the referendum on the Ukraine-EU treaty was won with a landslide (against the EU) and King Willem Alexander went ahead like nothing happened.

Last edited by st jimmy; 28-07-2016 at 01:02 PM.
Likes: (1)
st jimmy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-07-2016, 01:30 PM   #15
grandmasterp
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: The SkegVegas Coast
Posts: 31,797
Likes: 2,578 (1,691 Posts)
Default

We did this one before St Jimmy. The Queen is a 'constitutional' monarch here in the UK which means the role has been 'constituted' or created by Parliament. That happened way back in 1689 via the Bill of Rights which changed the monarch's role from - being a 'ruler' -to - being a 'servant of Parliament'.
She has no political powers and only gets to read out the policies that the government of the day have written for her to read out on 'Queen's Speech' day when she is 'invited' into Parliament. She isn't allowed in at any other time.
We don't have a written constitution, we have 'case law'.
The government we vote for enacts laws and judges rule on case law.
Voters vote for the government and 'simple majority wins'.
A parliamentary committee appoints all judges.
The Queen has to 'ratify' what Parliament decides. She has no power and no vote, she has influence but has to do as she is told. The monarch is expressly forbidden 'by Parliamentary Statute' from expressing personal political opinions in public at all- ever.
I hope that helps.

Last edited by grandmasterp; 28-07-2016 at 01:50 PM.
grandmasterp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-07-2016, 02:20 PM   #16
st jimmy
Senior Member
 
st jimmy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Amsterdam, Netherlands
Posts: 1,839
Likes: 1,282 (755 Posts)
Default

Queen Elizabeth has the powers of a dictator, because she is. The Queen and her (non-democratical) Privy Council are the only that can propose laws. The democratically elected House of Commons only has the power to veto the bills of the Queen.
I got the same kind of state conditioning as you, where they've told me over and over again, that the Queen has only a function of ceremony. If these monarchs would only have a ceremonial function they wouldn't have all of these powers (that make them dictators in effect).
So you still haven't read the Constitution of Japan, where you can read how in reality an "emperor" with only a ceremonial function, doesn't have any real power?
st jimmy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-07-2016, 02:23 PM   #17
grandmasterp
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: The SkegVegas Coast
Posts: 31,797
Likes: 2,578 (1,691 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by st jimmy View Post
Queen Elizabeth has the powers of a dictator, because she is. The Queen and her (non-democratical) Privy Council are the only that can propose laws. The democratically elected House of Commons only has the power to veto the bills of the Queen.
I got the same kind of state conditioning as you, where they've told me over and over again, that the Queen has only a function of ceremony. If these monarchs would only have a ceremonial function they wouldn't have all of these powers (that make them dictators in effect).
So you still haven't read the Constitution of Japan, where you can read how in reality an "emperor" with only a ceremonial function, doesn't have any real power?

Jimmy lad I am presuming you are a foreigner and possibly slightly dim hence haven't a clue what you are talking about as far as the UK monarchy goes.
Just look it up buddy.. 'Bill of Rights 1689' is a good place to start.
No point debating with you if you've obviously made up your mind.
Enjoy the delusions or learn.

Last edited by grandmasterp; 28-07-2016 at 02:24 PM.
grandmasterp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-07-2016, 02:36 PM   #18
st jimmy
Senior Member
 
st jimmy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Amsterdam, Netherlands
Posts: 1,839
Likes: 1,282 (755 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by grandmasterp View Post
Enjoy the delusions or learn.
I agree that at least one of us is delusioned...
st jimmy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-07-2016, 02:53 PM   #19
sevenhills
Senior Member
 
sevenhills's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: On a Pennine hillside
Posts: 2,636
Likes: 1,232 (797 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by st jimmy View Post
Queen Elizabeth has the powers of a dictator, because she is. The Queen and her (non-democratical) Privy Council are the only that can propose laws. The democratically elected House of Commons only has the power to veto the bills of the Queen.
I got the same kind of state conditioning as you, where they've told me over and over again, that the Queen has only a function of ceremony. If these monarchs would only have a ceremonial function they wouldn't have all of these powers (that make them dictators in effect).
So you still haven't read the Constitution of Japan, where you can read how in reality an "emperor" with only a ceremonial function, doesn't have any real power?
That is just pure made up
sevenhills is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-07-2016, 03:12 PM   #20
st jimmy
Senior Member
 
st jimmy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Amsterdam, Netherlands
Posts: 1,839
Likes: 1,282 (755 Posts)
Default Read Wikipedia if you don't believe me

This is what I found on the "independendent" Wikipedia. Queen Elizabeth can: 1) dismiss and appoint the Prime Minister, 2) dismiss and appoint other ministers, 3) summon and prorogue Parliament, 4) grant or refuse Royal Assent to bills (making them valid and law), 5) commission officers in the army, 6) command the army, 7) appoint members to the Privy Council, 8) issue and withdraw passports, 9) grant prerogative of mercy, 10) grant honours, 11) create corporations by Royal Charter, 12) appoint bishops and archbishops of the Church of England, 13) ratify and make treaties, 14) declare war and peace, 15) recognise states, 16) accredit and receive diplomats, 17) fill vacancies in the Supreme Court.
The Queen can make new laws by “Orders in Council” that either come in effect immediately as sort of a decree (Royal Prerogatives), but can be repealed by the Parliament, or with an act of Parliament. There is only one other institute in Britain that can propose laws, this is not the democratically elected House of Commons, but the Queen’s Privy Council that can propose Orders of Council without the Queen´s approval.
You can read Wikepedia yourself or try my other thread: https://forum.davidicke.com/showthread.php?t=309769
Likes: (1)
st jimmy is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:15 PM.


Shoutbox provided by vBShout (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.