Elite Criminals Have A Superpower: They Couldn't Care Less
You can, if you wish, spend the rest of your life waiting to elect your saviour. You can start by spending the next six months fantasising about 'voting the bastards out'. If that's your plan, the political con has got you in its spell. I invite you to snap out of that sorcery and confront reality. Nobody wins an election where all the candidates have the same owners. There's no route to liberty when to vote a jailer out you must vote a jailer in.
Illustrating the two faces of the Uniparty, last week Britain's Labour Party leader Kier Starmer promised that -one day quite soon- he will explain to the public the difference between Labour's plan for immigration control and the Conservative one.
Translation: Starmer will wait until he hears what the 'Conservative Plan' is supposed to be, and then his staff will come up with something that sounds slightly different. If Starmer and Labour had any such plan (which of course they do not) they could easily explain it today.
Just take a step back and ask yourself what the hell political parties are for if it's not to make plans for things like stopping the invasion of your country? It's ridiculous but obvious that in Britain there is no plan. The invasion is exactly what has been arranged and it's going very nicely, thankyou.
Starmer's 'promise' is -like all immigration promises- an extended middle-finger to the public. Fuck off, bigot! says Starmer and his union mafia. Fuck off, sucker! says Johnson and his Asian Borg. There is no alternative. There is no political divide when one party's 'ideology' consists of re-phrasing the other's. Both parties know perfectly well the 'Conservative Plan' for immigration control will be just the latest soundbite in the series: ("legislation...the Navy...Rwanda...the dog ate my homework...")
BREXIT BULL
The public's attachment to the idea that voting works is bordering on imbecilic. The current regime was elected on the back of a single issue -take Britain out of the European Union. Six years later, the EU still shovels thousands of immigrants onto our island every week, and the government's theatrical gestures in response are -by prior arrangement- vetoed by EU laws and EU lawyers.
This is happening because our
democracy, like our Brexit, is a myth. The regime has decided they would
rather not accept orders from the public after all. Your future is of
no interest to elite criminals; they simply don't care about you or your
wishes. Described as 'the most important vote in British history' the
referendum was a meaningless PR exercise - a theatrical performance
staged to defuse the public's justifiable anger at a corrupt political
class. They couldn't care less.
For what it's worth, I believe the elite were secretly thrilled to find the public could be held at bay simply by saying the word 'Brexit'. Although nothing actually changed, both the public concern and the formal political 'opposition' evaporated in the wake of the referendum. After three years of Look At Your Lovely Brexit bluff and baloney, the elite criminals just laughed and rolled out the Covid pantomime. That masterpiece conveniently erased all other social concerns, while miraculously permitting the EU/globalist agenda to proceed at an accelerated pace.
In the past, politicians who treated voters with such contempt would have triggered a mass uprising and national outrage. General strikes, taxes withheld, etc. But we do not live in an age of active dissent. The public would rather reach for a biscuit than a pitchfork. Twenty years in, it's clear that the 21st century is an era of mass hypnosis. From September 2001 on, we have lived in a collective fantasy world, dazzled by non-stop media spotlights that redirect our attention at will.
The globalised success of the diabolical 9/11 show -broadcast live on every channel on earth- and the bombastic 'war on terror' that followed proved how western populations would passively accept almost any abomination, given enough television commentary and a full fridge.
Harnessing the transfixing power of the now inescapable speakers and screens, the ruling class is approaching a plateau of decadence to rival the last days of the Roman empire. I offer you two different examples -both from the last 18 months- of how elite parasites can operate as a law unto themselves.
RUST
Alec Baldwin
...is an enormously popular film and tv star who rose to fame in the 1980's. In recent years he became the darling of the American political establishment thanks to his incessant, venomous criticism of Donald Trump. In October of 2021, Baldwin killed a cinematographer named Halyna Hutchins at Bonanza Creek Ranch in New Mexico. The incident took place during a rehearsal on the set of the cowboy-movie Rust. Baldwin was the lead actor, co-owner of the production company and the main financier; the movie was very much his own property.
He shot Hutchins in the chest with a vintage colt revolver, and the bullet exited her body to injure a second crew-member. At least six crew witnessed the horrific event, which took place at close-quarters in a purpose-built church. The production company was fined $137,000 dollars for failing to instigate adequate safety protocols at Bonanza Creek.
Various private lawsuits are in progress, with lawyers haggling over massive sums behind the scenes. Several Rust employees are blaming, shaming and suing each other. The victim's husband -armed with one of the most aggressive legal teams on the planet- is preparing a particularly hefty claim. Yet nine long months have passed without any criminal charges brought against Baldwin or anyone else, although the actor killed one of his own employees with a handgun in full view of a small crowd.
He
has also made the incredible claim -very publicly, in a
specially-filmed tv interview- that he did not even pull the gun's
trigger. [Watch an analysis of that interview on Youtube HERE]
In a statement he may well live to regret, Baldwin said he felt in no way personally to blame for Hutchin's death, insisting that all his actions were dictated by others (every one of whom he was employing). This image -the Hollywood superstar as a humble automaton blindly obeying instructions- is hardly plausible given Baldwin's film-industry reputation as a short-tempered, egocentric prima-donna.
 |
| ALEC BALDWIN REHEARSING DAYS BEFORE THE INCIDENT |
Given
the astonishing amount of time that has passed since the fatal
shooting, a host of independent firearms experts have taken the
opportunity to demonstrate that Baldwin's description of his
gun-handling is -from a technical perspective- far from credible.
Curiously, media reports at the time invariably referred to the fatal
shot coming from a 'prop gun'. [See the BBC report HERE].
It seems the origin of this phrase was likely Baldwin himself. The
actor repeatedly parroted the phrase 'prop gun' in interviews and on
social media. But this is creative language being used to confuse.
The word 'prop' implies an imitation or a fake -presumably harmless- version of a real object. But it turns out the firearm which killed Hutchins was a 100% real gun in every sense. So real, in fact, that crew members were in the habit of using it -loaded with live ammunition- to shoot beer-cans for target practice on the Bonanza Creek Ranch itself.
It
seems that on Baldwin's somewhat chaotic film-location, several
potentially lethal guns were freely available for recreational shooting
parties, complete with boxes of dummy, blank and live ammunition. Even
worse, reports have surfaced that prior to Hutchins' death there had
already been two separate incidents of live ammunition being discharged from
guns "by accident" during filming. Several crew-members
had quit the day before Hutchins' death, and "safety concerns" were
quoted as being part of that decision.
Does anyone seriously believe the average person running a film set -or any other kind of business involving guns- could walk away scot-free after such a catalogue of irresponsibilities? In retrospect it seems that on the set of Rust, a serious shooting injury or death -accidental or not- was more or less inevitable.
Alec Baldwin appears not only unrepentant but untouchable. Would a gun-shop owner or even a policeman be afforded the same hands-off approach as this notoriously volatile celebrity loudmouth? An innocent woman killed in broad daylight with a loaded handgun -and nine months later nobody has been charged with a single crime? According to the Santa Fe County Sherrif's Office and the District Attorney 'The investigation into Halyna Hutchins' death is ongoing.'
COVID CONS
On March 5th 2021
...a High Court judge ruled that Boris Johnson -Prime Minister of the United Kingdom- lied to Parliament. Johnson's office had illegally concealed the details of 100 contracts for Covid-related PPE which handed billions of pounds to Conservative-party linked businesses. Three days before this ruling the PM had appeared in the House of Commons and stated that 100% of all Covid contracts were "on the record".
As The Good Law Project revealed, this was illegal because "unless contract details are published they cannot be properly scrutinised -there's no way of knowing where taxpayers' money is going and why."
The judge's ruling noted that when ordered to produce evidence that the contracts had been made public, the government submitted FOUR false accounts before the truth finally emerged. In fact, 100 contracts and dozens of Contract Award Notices had never been placed on the public record. Billions had been spent on Covid PPE, much of which turned out to be useless.
Significantly, a request was made to have these court proceedings televised so the public could follow the revelations as they happened. That request was rejected by the Secretary of State.
Boris Johnson had misled Parliament, his office had supplied false accounts to the law-courts and his government had tried to hide its financial mismanagements from the entire country. The Conservative party had successfully steered huge sums into the hands of its cronies in the business-world. All this took place in secret while the public and the press were effectively locked in their own homes on Johnson's personal orders.
On April 13th 2022 the Prime Minister was found guilty of infringing his own Covid regulations and fined £50 by the Metropolitan Police for a single offence committed in June 2020. Numerous media sources reported that Johnson had attended at least five other illegal social events which had resulted in government staff being fined. Why, the question arose, was the PM fined only once when clearly he was a persistent and multiple offender?
All Boris Johnson's party-going exploits took place while the British public were effectively prisoners in their own homes, forbidden to socialise by the PM himself.
To summarise, Britain's highest elected official has repeatedly broken laws he himself created and misled Parliament on numerous occasions -supposedly an offence requiring his resignation, according to Parliament's own guidelines. His office supplied false accounts to the law courts four times, and his government swindled billions of pounds out of the taxpayers to benefit its own supporters.
Instead of resigning, on June 25th the British PM held a Press Conference while visiting Rwanda as part of his pretend-strategy to 'tackle immigration'. Asked about his political future, Johnson claimed he was "actively thinking" of continuing as Prime Minister until the year 2030. The British Premier refused, however, to comment on a report in the Times that he was arranging to build a £150,000 tree-house for his son Wilf at Chequers, using money from Tory donor Lord Brownlaw. The ultra-loyal Brownlaw had previously coughed up £58,000 to have Johnson's Downing Street flat 'madeover' by a top interior designer.
They couldn't care less what we think. We're hypnotised, they believe. Perhaps we are.
Comments
Post a Comment