Chatroulette old version at sfgh yesterday afternoon Chatroulette old version at sfgh yesterday afternoon Register Login Contact Us

Gardiner Montana girls wanting to fuck


Gardiner Montana girls wanting to fuck

Online: Now

About

I just didn't want to post them here for the whole world to see. I am easy going laid back man. I prefer lesbian womans (feminine) between the age 25-35 that are DDD free.

Doria
Age:41
Relationship Status:Never Married
Seeking:I Seeking Couples
City:Belmont
Hair:Blonde
Relation Type:Looking To Eat And Fuck Some Pussy Tonight Can Host In Mi

Gardiner Montana girls wanting to fuck

Find Sluts Arcola Mississippi

Its a mental one as well. Vulcan eye'd medicine,spiritual hands motioning abovethe body of togethernessthree sisters materializedthe indifference of a lonesome sky.

Six 7. Any Normal boys out there. I am-eleven, one-eighty. NSA if that's your choice. I am pretty submissive, but not into pain. Horny married women ready nauty girls College student waiting for friend maybe more Please Dont Respond IF Your Not Serious.

More on the stellar exponent of revisionism, Miles Williams Mathis , dependent on the unprecedented access to documents by Internet—books, monographs, news items, biographies, photos—which even the best libraries of the past couldn't match.

Internet permits families to be checked for distinctive signs of Jew tampering, biographies to be compared and checked for absurdities, intersections detected between organisations, and so on. Perhaps unexpectedly, the Jew-patrolled Wikipedia is a fertile source for data mining of biographies.

An interesting possibility is that monarchs and dynasties may be checked for Jewish infiltration. This technique is well-adapted to smallish groups—families, aristocracies, leaders—but less useful for large-scale events, such as wars, invasions, and anything large-scale.

If records will be published giving information on corporations, armies, large industries, governments and so on, no doubt data mining could lead to huge advances in understanding. Mathis supplements 1 Biographies with 2 visual clues, derived from his portrait painting, as to facial and body similarities and sizes, and related issues of photo fakery; and 3 organisational procedures and promotions in legal, military, aristocratic family, and intelligence structures.

So that—just three examples—Charles Manson, bearded and in prison, is impossible. And the Tate killings were a fake. And the Dresden bombing or at least photo s were faked.

Examples, from Mathis' site in Oct Hawthorne looks back at Bostonians and the East India Co , plus Thoreau , and Walt Whitman Lincoln is a terrific reassessment of the 'assassination' by an actor in , and Custer of Custer in Marx as far as I know, one of the best pieces on Marx looks at wealthy industrialists often of course 'Jews' misleading radicals, as does Labour Party, Noami Klein, Naomi Wolf Trayvon is on race wars, which Mathis seems to think are not real—he doesn't seem to sense the intentional Jewish prompting.

Taxes is a paper on deliberate lies about servicing interest payments. I'm not claiming all his work is correct or original; but it's a relief to see head-on revisionism. Sharon Tate and O J Simpson. At the time of writing, Mathis is looking at the beginning of the 'American Revolution': Who Was George Washington?

He writes Everyone knew that there must be someone behind this cardboard cut-out, someone capable of making real decisions. Half-heartedly we have thought to ourselves that maybe it was Hoover or Kissinger or Greenspan or Cheney, as the case may be, but have never felt satisfied by this.

Could Mathis be hiding the Rothschilds, for example? Perhaps it's the fate of Jews to keep their secrets beyond the columbarium, to be as lost to history as the builders of Avebury and Stonehenge? Extract from a Miles Mathis piece, to illustrate his style. Reformatted from pdf to HTML. Hambros Bank was known as the diamond bank for its connections to South Africa and the big diamond traders there all Jewish, of course—Rhodes, Rothschild, Oppenheimer, DeBeers, etc. After the war, Hambros Bank was one of the top three banks in Europe.

Hambro's mother was a Stuart and his grandmother was a Gostenhofer. So these people were not Danish. In fact, the name Hambro was changed from Levi in the late s. That link is from Geni. The name Hambro comes from Hamburg, where the family lived before Denmark.

These Hambros were also related to the Morgans. It was just a grand theft in plain daylight, with no cover but these media lies. In fact, it had been done before. Charlie's nephew Peter Hambro worked for Hambros Bank until it was absorbed, at which point he went to work for discount house Smith St.

Note the name there, which came up my paper on Harry Potter and also above in the ancestry of Gary Player. Hambro then went to work for bullion house Mocatta and Goldsmid. What they don't tell you is that the Hambros probaby are Goldsmids.

See here where Hambro's Levi ancestors are also Goldziehers , a variant. As it turns out, the Hambros are also related to the Normans. See Montagu Norman above. That explains their connection. Of course, through the Stuarts, the Hambros are also related to the Palmers.

Also to the Townshends, etc. But Roundell Palmer insisted that its personnel, assassination capabilities, assets, and intelligence arrangements be continued underground in Western Europe, in a quasi-war against the Soviet Union. The very existence of MI6, the British Secret Intelligence Service, was not officially acknowledged until Since writing all the above, Mathis has written a piece on Benito Mussolini published 14th Sept , showing Mussolini was a Jew, whose Jewish mistress was part of a series of Jews from Venice and the east, and the Jewish Jagiellon dynasty.

The 'March on Rome' was no doubt a fake—and his acting a fake—and the bodies hanging upside-down image a fake. Mathis understandably wearies with the details of WW2, including fake jailings cp. Hitler's supposed jailing of a Rothschild and fake campaigns and real or alleged assets in Africa. Mathis is certainly loosening the logjam, working his one-man campaign against the legions of Jew-subservient hacks, who are trying to lash together the creaking timbers.

What a pity his technique can't be applied to the characters used by the Biblical 'Yeshua freak' Jew-subservient types doing what they can to rot the USA's intellect. It's also a pity it's hard to apply to Chinese and Japanese and other languages, for westerners. What information on Chinese 'Communism', and post Jewish 'elites', and trade and technology, might be unearthed, assuming they have genealogical info! Whether something similar might work in Africa, and southern America including Mexico , and Arab countries depends I'd guess on availability of genealogies.

Was Hitler an Agent? This idea has started to surface seriously, and ought to be taken seriously. People brought up with the conventional propaganda of the West naturally enough find the idea ludicrous. I was one of these, and occasionally was quite impolite to exponents of the idea—most of whom, however, as far as I know, weren't incredibly convincing. I don't know about Russians or east Europeans, or people in the Pacific 'theatres' of war. It has long been part of the propaganda battle that Hitler was funded by bankers.

And at the time Hitler was widely credited with huge and successful reforms. Another part of the propaganda battle is that Germany wanted to take over the world, despite its small size. This seems to be a permanent feature of Jewish propaganda; much the same was said of Vietnam, Iraq, even North Korea. This Hitler-revisionist view is I take it based on the idea that Jews form a nation, as a layer across the world, in detailed networking communication with each other relying, now, on computer information and spying; and supported by Jewish localised propaganda —BBC, German broadcasting, US media, as just three examples.

In this way national opinions are controlled, with of course the possibility for local hostility, wars, and so on. Soros's activities in eastern European countries illustrate one version of this. Jews in the US, controlling media aimed at US blacks, illustrate another version—at present, stirring up anti-white violence such as rapes and murders, while simultaneously controlling 'news' to pretend it doesn't happen.

Another example is media control in Germany, causing German self-loathing—but also media control in Britain, inducing white British self-loathing. Can we transfer this model to the case of Hitler? The Suppressed Importance of Hungary. Germany and Austro-Hungary were on the same side in the 'Great War'. The Hungarian Soviet Republic of Bela Kun and other names; mentioned by Churchill in failed and caused Jews in Hungary to move out, contributing e.

But perhaps its most important result was caution over Germany: Jewish bankers must have paused, and it may be that Hitler was chosen as a moderate, and then watched. Remember Jews had a long history of invading Germany, and also that Germany had only recently been unified in ; certainly with Jewish involvement and was a leading economic power.

The ramshackle Jewish nonsense of 'Communism', and supposed common ownership of production and distribution, if it had convinced Germans, may have worried Jews: And certainly when Hitler came to power, many Jews were jubilant. Presumably, whoever controls Jewish world policy aims to maximise deaths of rivals and profits from them , taking into account their power structures: Here are just some examples needing re-examination: How was Germany after not being invaded at any point come to its collapse?

How come they were allowed to slip out of debts, when others didn't? BUT in all these cases soldiers were fighting other soldiers; there was no direct Jew involvement at all. What possible point could there be in whites fighting each other? But Russians were victims of Jews; what sense did it make to kill ordinary Russians? Very possibly, the natural-enough focussing on national battles enabled the Jewish interest to be left entirely undiscussed.

Could Hitler have made a fourth? Many are testable, at least in principle. The issue of whether Hitler was a genuine warrior against Jewish Tyranny is vitally important. If Hitler was genuine, we the goyim have hope that our European peoples can give rise to genuine leaders. If Hitler was a Jew who was used by the Rothschilds to lead Germany into ruin, we the goyim But they also pre-advertise them] Von Stauffenberg wanted Hitler dead The plot goes directly to the issue of Hitler's true intentions for Germany.

It would seem, therefore, that Hitler was a genuine opponent of Jews. It may have been that Hitler, despite his dealings with Jewish central bankers, had gone off-script and was pursuing his own aims.

I don't know what to make of Rudolf Hess or Operation Paperclip An argument for surmising that Hitler indeed was a Rothschild agent is Hitler's refusal to incorporate Vlasov's army of disillusioned Russian soldiers into the Wehrmacht despite the pleas of his generals.

Hitler knew that Germany was "scripted" to lose. That is why Hitler destroyed the German army by attacking Russia in the dead of winter. Hess was kept imprisoned his whole life for trying to expose the Rothschild-Churchill-Clivedon-Hitler Hoax. Rothschilds and their Judeomasonic flunkeys don't start wars until they control ALL sides.

The Most Beautiful Girls In The World

Jews have no hesitation in manufacturing fake history, as the present day proves, and there's no reason why they shouldn't have done this to profit from early Christianity] Early Christianity seems to have been named after the Greek word meaning 'illuminated' or 'golden' , in a similar sense to 'the light of the world' or 'bright spirit'.

Hence the chi-rho and fish symbol. No 'Jesus' character whatsoever. The Romans appear to have had the idea of amalgamating and collecting together parts of extant religions from their part of the world , with the intention of psychologically unifying their unstable empire. Sensible enough, and perhaps a precursor to the idea of 'conversion', which must have seemed a new outlook to tribal peoples.

Much of the ancient world survives to this day: Many shared to some extent with Sanskrit and Into-European roots. Why would a Roman-empire wide religion not be made up of such elements? Constantine's genuine or supposed conversion in A. Evidence shows Jews have no scruples in manufacturing or destroying evidence. Evidence shows Jews may claim to have invented or originated anything considered desirable.

Modern evidence shows Jews, if they lied to claim to have taken part in establishing Christianity, will lie more, claiming progressively more influence over the past. Whether ancient 'Jews' are related to modern 'Jews' is a controversial question; but the same written 'laws' and stories can reasonably be supposed to affect populations subject to them in similar ways. Ancient 'Jews' must therefore be suspected of being persistent liars, too.

A popular religion, perhaps Roman-slave-based, or perhaps more generally based, which professed to enlighten people, might reasonably be expected to include elements from Roman, perhaps with other tribal and national elements. There might for example have been books of Persian beliefs, of Babylonian beliefs, of Egyptian beliefs, of Greek beliefs, of Roman beliefs, and other long-established written sources. No doubt with then-modern Christian material, showing why they were wrong or obsolete or unenlightened.

I'd like to suggest there may have been a process, over several centuries, in which Jews made up their own stories about 'Jeshua', also known as 'the Christ', or 'Jesus Christ', and insisted upon them in their Jewish group way , redefining 0 A.

Three centuries is about the length of time taken for Jews to take over England, then the USA, and invent and promote bogus histories, so the time scale seems plausible enough. I've put here a small sample of the evidence that Jesus never existed. In short, I suspect the 'Old Testament' progressively was forced into Christianity, despite having no connection whatever with the origins of Christianity.

And the 'New Testament' itself was Judaised, replacing genuine early Christian works. Here's Wheless's book Forgery in Christianity which lists assorted plagiarisms and forgeries in the early church, based on writings which survived, or allegedly survived.

Emmett Fields dated the end of US free thought to January 2, From that time on, the Federal Government waged relentless war against religious liberty.

But Wheless does not think of the possibility of systematic Jewish forgery or adaptation from their own mythologies. The idea is reinforced by plenty of modern examples of bogus religions fostered by Jews, including many aspects of the Reformation, Quakers see Miles Mathis' excellent new piece on George Fox , Mormonism, and Christian Science. This idea probably ought to be most important in the USA, which has large numbers of more or less fundamentalist types, probably only possible in a relatively rich or heavily subsidised society, with heavy Jewish control over information.

Some Americans think the Bible was written in English; some think there was an ark, built of wood from an American tree; some like the Scofield Bible; some can't understand evolution; some think that Jews were chosen by a God. These people are a danger through their stupidity and inertia, and their inability to help with anything useful in the world. It's unlikely they will change, since they have found a mental niche which they find comforting. But I would ask as many people as possible to view their material with the skepticism which is necessary with modern Jews.

The 'Acts' are not a historical record. The 'Gospels' are self-contradictory and ridiculous. These are joint, collective lies, which persist over long stretches of time. And clearly have intention behind them. Motives include promoting wars, getting the Fed for Jews, changing propaganda schemes to face new enemies or to work for new wars for Jews, continual statistical lies on e. So we have this hypothesis [3] I'm saying the NT was just another set of Jewish lies.

Not stories, not history, not an honest attempt at a record. But purely for Jewish aim s. Perhaps heading off an early religion in the Roman Empire, which looked likely to form a new composite religion. I won't name it, as that will confuse people. So they wrote a whole set of stories, based around 'Yeshua', almost as Spielberg composed his absurd films, Weisel orated his 'Holocaust' lies for a lifetime, or Jewish 'historians' of the holohoax orchestrate and embroider their lies.

The main point was to get them out, published, available to be forced onto people; further detail could come after. This time frame is similar to e. I've seen the argument that US Jewish-controlled 'Universities' now all accept the Bible as reliable—'proof', since even Marxists accept this.

But of course if the whole thing was a Jewish set of stories, they would be likely to support it, whatever the evidence. All they had to do was put forward their own lies and—provided there was sufficient promotional push and destruction of opposition—Piso would be forgotten.

Jews often do this; for example, the leading physicist over the last few centuries was Newton, so Einstein was manufactured as a substitute. To take a totally different example, the Beatles were one of the most influential music groups of the 20th century. If Jews started a promotional myth that 'The Bagels' were the best ever, with their famous 'Abbey Schul' and 'Light Blue Double Album' achievements, who can tell whether this would be accepted in years' time?

But it is exactly the same policy that Jews follow: I'd suggest all, or most, persecution of 'heretics' was in effect by Jews. And ditto with censorship and destruction of books, however innocent or instructional.

Books were fairly freely available during Greek and Roman times, and it's therefore likely works on paganism, or true history, or Jewish lies, or Europeans and Africans and Asians, would have been destroyed by Jews. Because of the obscurity of early Christians, intelligent people will be cautious; online sources claim the first fifteen Popes were Jewish, but this turns out to mean that some organisation in Jerusalem is claimed to have had 15 leaders in about years, presumably 'Jews'.

Even the title and meaning of 'Pope' isn't clear. For example, scene-setting and opinion-setting. Many Jewish films start with fictional stuff on how actress X is the most beautiful woman in the world, collecting her beauty award, and gasped at by big crowds. In the same way, the 'Jesus' figure is supported by miracles, impossible events, epigrams supposed to suggest wisdom, marvels, scatterings of enemies, etc etc.

Rather oddly, this feature seems to be the basis of many people's reaction, which is that the Bible is full of reliable and accurate material—something like the opposite of the truth. AND NOTE that the Catholic Church of course was fronted by non-Jews, most of the time , but they had their own views on what issues mattered, leading to interminable cryptic disputes. No doubt the Roman Empire's collapse was helped by such rented people diverting assets away from the state, and away from ordinary people.

A situation recognisably similar to the present day. If you see my point, I'd welcome serious comments. I'd particularly welcome comment on Churches post- about AD, and interactions between Jews and non-Jews, and on e. And the invention of Islam, and the Khazar issue. And of course promotion of wars and invasions, as parallels with modern times.

Discoveries of new territories and the corresponding increases in ease of travel. Any insights, based on the idea that the Bible was a Jewish promo job; what were they trying to promote, in different eras? There may well be insights waiting to be seen and outed! The New Testament does not mention Christianity at all—understandably, as the Church did not exist at the time.

So if some other religion say, Mithraism, or Gnosticism, or RomanEmpirism, or Anythingism, or pan-Paganism, or revivedBabylonism had emerged, the NT could be used against them, so Jews could muscle in.

They may have prepared stories, later dropped, to plan for these eventualities—in the same way modern 'Jews' prepare media campaigns against Germans, Vietnamese, whites, Iraqis, Moslems etc. Knowledge by acquaintance is arguably simpler—just a matter of senses and memory of nearby things and events. But knowledge by description has the feature that it may be incorrect. People may believe things which are totally wrong, misleading, inaccurate, or whatever. How are they to know whether they're being lied to?

A good case can be made for credulity being partly genetic: This is not an issue which arises much with animals: So there is a lot to be said for young children believing what they are told. But if scepticism and logic and curiosity vary genetically, it must be possible for different patterns to develop: The Khazar hypothesis that so-called 'Jews' were a mass conversion, with no genetic connection with Jews is more credible than many people like to believe, because the fanatical elements in judaism—expulsion or deaths for nonbelievers, more children for their priest caste, discreet killings of non-members, firm belief based on zero evidence—would feed back over the generations to produce a Jew-like population.

I'd like to suggest Christianity had a similar genetic effect over many generations, making populations move over to credulousness and away from logical thought. My online chats with believers incline me to think so. As with Judaism, killings of heretics, insistence on repeated fairy tales, penalties for critics, must have a long-term effect over many generations. The same must apply to Islam. It seems possible to me that Christianity had the good luck to be optional, unlike the monolithic fanatical tribal 'religions' of Jews, Muslims, and many others.

That is to say, it had a specialised caste with no definite power over non-Christians, so that experimenters, philosophers, and others could exist, if not flourish.

At present, there's a gulf between people who, though recognising the difficulties, see that scientific thought and logical debate must be the way forward; and a vast mass of believers in emotional assertiveness, unevidenced misinformation, and wishful thinking. A longer and more detailed book is Prof. Neither of these authors, Robertson or Wells, has any concept of 'Kosher' forces which successfully agitated for, then imposed, 'Jesus Christ' on top of early Christianity, which, if it even existed as a genuine non-Jewish movement, had no place for a 'Yeshua'.

Prometheus Books is an arm of the 'skeptics', US people funded by Jews; Wells would not have been published, had he been Jew-aware. Helps Pave the Way for Future Understanding. Review by Rerevisionist, Jan 7th, I have a copy of this book, in the original small-format red hardback of the 'Thinker's Library'. First printed , second edition There are other editions, some, I think, more or less pirated; or perhaps the copyright situation isn't clear.

Whether these are accurate, I don't know; for interested readers I'd recommend an original copy, just in case. The contents are more or less chronological, with Chapter 1 containing Christian writings, Chapter 2 writings by everyone else—with some overlap—and Chapter 3 leaping forward to post-Reformation times, no doubt because criticism of the Bible in the Middle Ages is difficult to find.

I'd guess Robertson—British son of a theologian in Durham, and impeccably public-schooled and degreed—absorbed much of the material in his father's house. I haven't found any supposed texts showing the existence of Jesus, not found in Robertson. The book has a fairly detailed helpful index.

My view is that, at the time of the various commentators, nobody influential appreciated the fact the Jews, who were, presumably, behind the Jesus promotion, seem to have a genetic tendency to lie —something which may go back to the days when language was still developing, in the remotest depths of time. Much as visual camouflage would not have evolved until sight had developed, modes of use of language could not predate speech.

It's now clear that Jews have an exceptional tendency to lie—this may be compared to some creatures which lie [pun not really intended! Before the days of technological aids, such as writing, and, now, photographs and fingerprints and videos etc etc etc, convincing liars must have been hard to detect. It's now plausible that Jews made up the 'New Testament' as a Jewish fantasy, or film script, or advertisement, or promotion of a Jewish 'hero' aimed at gullible goyim.

It's what they do. People who describe Christianity as a 'Jewish Trojan horse' are no doubt correct. The idea that there was a ferment of religious ideas in the Roman Empire may also be untrue. It's now known that Jewish strategies include defaming and subverting and critiquing rival societies; it's entirely likely the supposed unease leading to religious change was a Jewish manufacture.

The remaining problem is how Jews could have done this; they didn't have the Federal Reserve to print them endless money.

They may have had the ear of prominent Romans. They may have used unreliable, dysfunctional, disgruntled people to spread the world, much as non-Jewish 'Marxists' now, and in the past, often fit this description, and often co-operate in treachery which is mildly profitable to them. A modern question which may occur to the reader is why a Jew-based publishing house should risk subverting their racial group with a serious presentation of the idea of the non-existence of 'Yeshua'.

There have been alternations in self-images of Christians, and I'd guess their feeling was that Christians in were a bit too independent. The story of Jewish collaborators through the centuries hasn't begun to be described yet. Treating the tedious 'epistles' which preceded the 'Gospels' as genuine or faked doesn't really matter.

The advertising and promotional aspect is the important thing. Wikipedia, the guaranteed easily-available source of US-Jew-approved deception, says Early Christianity was the 'period of Christianity preceding the First Council of Nicaea in This is of course absurd—as though Christians would say, I'll know what I believe when a council I've never heard of makes its ruling.

But it is all 'Jewish'. Wikipedia has no entry for 'primitive Christianity', propbably a useful phrase to refer to beliefs before Jews intervened. Let me try again to get the concept across to the brainwashed. Imagine the world develops, somewhere, a new movement: Suppose a belief system develops, which might be described as a religion; it doesn't really matter.

The people call themselves Peacists, talk about Peacism, regard Peacism as an important part of their lives. Peacism, if it's lucky, spreads, irregularly; 'Peacism' becomes a part, if a small part, of life in its corner of the world.

There may be some Peacists who become well-known. The doctrines of Peacism lead to poems and jokes about it, achievements and commentaries and practical effects, donations, converts, de-converts, meetings, songs, buildings. The thesis I'm making is based on the facts about 'Holocaustianity', a religion based on pure fraud in which all Jews at the present time are united.

Advertising, deception, bribery of pseudo-academics, control over media, legal controls and all the rest of it are probably known to readers here. What, drawing lessons from 'Holocaustianity', might have been the stages in the invention of Christianity as it is now perceived? Now suppose a group with influence and absurd ideas about themselves see this new group, and want to colonise it, much as they might want to rule a new country.

Although they have had no interest in Peacism, slowly a new name will be made up and promoted, let's say Menache Peacst. Slowly, but increasingly, the works of Menarche, the miracles of Menarche, the sayings of Menarche, the travels of Menarche appear in booklets, books, talks by odd-looking men, and so on. An ever-growing flood of words, attributed to Menarche Peacst, drowns out the original Peacists, in spite of their protestations and indignation.

The Peacst is praised, Menarche is praised, the life of Menarche is written about by scriptwriters—even though Menarche never existed in fact.

A Darwinian process means that stories about Menarche Peacst grow some appealing aspects, and shed some absurdities and errors.

In a few hundred years, the original beliefs of Peacism are all but lost, and any books or documents are destroyed ruthlessly by Peacst followers, anxious to remove evidence, and wanting to remove all trace of the genuine beliefs of Peacism. For 'Menarche Peacst' read 'Yeshua Christ'—translated as 'Jesus'—where the opinions of early Christians are effaced by the intruded Jewish fake, so much so that almost everyone assumes unthinkingly that Christians, who started originally as 'golden' or 'enlightened', are synonymous with 'Jesus Christ'.

By this stage, collaborators can be bought, and are likely to have a similar temperament: Miles Mathis suggests very convincingly that Quakers were encouraged. I owe to Miles W Mathis the attitude that 'Marxism' was a manufactured set of beliefs, plagiarised or made up by Jews, designed to support what they think are their interests. The Communist Manifesto , for example, was plagiarised.

For Jews, notably absent in creative impulses—no art, buildings, food, clothes, literature to speak of, inventions, science; only their traditional low-grade viciousness mediated by lies—it is essential to parasitise non-Jews.

Jews presumably instinctively panic when thwarted, as parasites must act imperatively if they see their food and shelter being taken away. Another possibility which only occurred to me today, reviewing a book by Alex Comfort.

Some musings on the UN. Here's a page with essentially the same theory, earlier than mine, with Rome and Alexandria as two rival city ideological battlegrounds. Watch Jews Continue Lying! I'm assuming it's a Jewish source; it has all the fingerprints. This is The Daily Bell. It's listed by similarweb as , worldwide, 45, in the USA it's English language. I've copied below the meat of the Daily Bell article, which as it admits, was largely taken from the entries in https: I don't want to go into detail; there will probably be many more similar articles on the web.

Let me just note a few things, and give a few sample links -- Nuclear power is not discussed. Probably because it's very much a live issue, and without much of the emotional baggage of horror attributed to 'nuclear bombs'. The likelihood it's a huge fraud, mostly Jewish, like the 'Holocaust' fraud, must of course be avoided by the controllers of Jews.

A Jewish fingerprint is the invention of phrases which it's hoped by repetition in the controlled media will take hold of the stupid goyim. For example, the Holohoax will probably be described as 'directed history' with passive implications it was e. Imabari and the antennae of Little Boy video over to the right - or Little Boys, since there were at least two!

Typically of Jews, actual pioneers and discoverers are not credited. Jews are never identified by Jewish hacks: The part played by Jews in generating fears of the USSR, to keep Jewish mass murders hidden, are of course unmentioned. Distracting and alarmist stuff seems natural to Jews.

There's no evidence for a death penalty for truth-telling, any more than there was for survivors of the Liberty. But of course steps were taken to completely censor Japanese news, European news and US news. The online article of 29 June Consider what we ["we" is the Bell article] have already uncovered just by scrutinizing the Internet and looking for evidence of "directed history" regarding the initial atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

There are other disturbing elements to the Nagasaki and Hiroshima bombings, and if you are interested, you can see more documents calling many elements of the attacks into question HERE. Thirteen at present Republican Party Presidential candidates for November 's election are online, on their own and with various interviewers. I've highlit, in yellow marker, Jewish issues below which seem unrecognised by Trump. Of course, he has to handle these issues with very great care.

US TV has had an insular history, cut off from most of the world, and amplified by Jewish control , like the dodo before their islands were invaded by competitors. T here are extraordinary bad TV interviews: Most Americans have no idea of their history. Jews just took over both the Democrat and Republican Parties, after their Fed coup. Woodrow Wilson was the Jews' biggest American success, I'd guess, in terms of world destruction.

Just as the coup in Russia was their biggest success in Europe and European Asia. I was working out what is so repulsive about these TV presenters, going through their routines like caged animals. Of course they are not primary parasites, like Warburgs, Schiffs, Eatons, Rothschilds or whatever, deciding who to assassinate, who to supply with weapons, which country to ruin, which puppets to play.

They aren't even secondary parasites flies around garbage. They are agents for secondary parasites—no surprise the American public is baffled by their coded phrases and flaring hostilities and Orwellian switches of allegiance. Lying seems to be encoded into the gene pool of Jews , maybe as a result of the Talmud being unleashed in Khazaria more than a millennium past.

But this does not appear to be the case with Trump; who, in his speeches, shows dislike and distaste for Jewish lies. M aybe this is connected with his work: Another example of Trump's insistence on detail is his account of a UN building to be refurbished, there the supposed project manager knew nothing of New York steam. He's good on black crimes kept hidden, distortions on figures: Escort him out very nicely And Trump turned Obama's TV off in disgust. And he hasn't even mentioned the cue screens to Obama's left and right.

We have to wonder if Jewish media agitation against Trump is serious. Trump is surrounded by Jews and has family conversions, and the New York property market is Jewish. So is the money supply. Maybe it's just a false dawn, as happened with Obama's lies. It seems unlikely; but who knows? Trump himself says he uses just his own money , and that his TV appearances attract huge interest from advertisers which TV networks like—it's easy to believe advertising interest in the other candidates' speeches is something like zero.

Obama or whatever his name is , the US 'President'. Trump doesn't spare him—no wonder Americans applaud. He's a danger to America. Trump might have included the rest of the world.

Obama won't mention radical Islamic terrorism. With Trump, "there's going to be real change—but not Obama 'change'". Trump will be a unifier, unlike Obama. Equatorial Guinea's "president" Teodoro Obiang Nguema Mbasogo, who has shot almost all his opponents. There is no freedom of the press, the country's one television station is government-run, and clean water is scarce. He is Africa's longest serving dictator after seizing power from his uncle and mentor who used to hang regime critics from the capital's street lights in Equatorial Guinea is one of sub-Saharan Africa's biggest oil-producing countries Another "honored guest" was Burkina Faso's Blaise Compaore [who] came to power in a bloody coup which left his predecessor Thomas Sankara dead.

Sankara had taken power alongside Compaore in another coup four years previously. T rump on illegals: Our country is a dumping ground. They are laughing, bringing drugs, bringing crime, rapists". But at least he's part of the way. After what she's done she shouldn't even be allowed to run Trump leads in almost all the polls.

We're being eaten away. But we have to get going. I think this is the most important election in the modern era It's got to happen in the next ten years Trump has Hispanic and black supporters, and gets them up on stage, admittedly in a slightly contrived way.

And there are small numbers of registered Republicans in both those ethnic groups. Hillary Clinton appears to have little chance of winning IF Trump gets whites out to vote, and IF voting fraud is kept down. White voters have to turn out in their states to get the 'winner take all' electoral college votes.

The entire USA has votes; California's 55 of is a high proportion. In , Obama's team and the Jewish propaganda, in California, got his group 7. The total California population estimate is Clearly, there have to be white voters prepared to turn out to get the 'electoral college' votes.

Mixed race voters never seem to be discussed, presumably because of the Jewish suppression of facts on race. If many 'blacks' become more honest about part-white ancestry, this might have significant effects.

Elections of Senators, and Representatives to the House of Representatives, are of course another issue. Praise for Ordinary Americans. Jewish treatment of workers has three prongs: But I think Trump's appreciation is probably genuine: Trump says he likes 'veterans'; he doesn't seem to know quite a few commit suicide, go mad, or are war criminals; and he seems naive about the Jewish links with the Second World War, Vietnam, etc.

He says his TV speeches bring so much advertising revenue that the networks ought to give to some homeless vets. In my opinion, his misunderstanding of Jewish control of the USA shows in his military talk: I'm going to make America so strong nobody's going to mess with us.. Possibly Trump has sat in with Jews, laughing at goyim deaths and warmongering and their money frauds.

Trump dislikes illegal immigrants—they are, after all, illegal. He wants a wall, and indeed could not only build it, but make Mexico pay. Trump doesn't seem to realise this is a long-standing Jewish policy: Before Internet, most whites were not aware of this covert policy, and had no idea that most invading 'migrants' live on public money. He takes this very seriously, including the game-theory idea of unpredictability, and spotlights and tries to discredit diplomats and back-room types, very probably rightly, in view of the huge unaccounted 'foreign aid' deals.

W hen Trump says an Iran deal was one of the worst deals ever, or that he will make Mexico pay for the border wall or lose business on a huge scale , he's breaking new ground. Maybe Jews uneasily remember that Germany decided they saw no reason to pay Jewish money-changers in the s, or that Gadaffi was working on a gold currency, or that North Korea does not have the burden of a Rothschild central bank.

On the Iran deal, there's an aspect which hardly anyone understands yet: Maybe Iran is exploiting their position: I don't know; but it's possible, as the costs of the deal are offloaded onto Americans, but not Jews. Trump is nuke naive, but this could change. He might find his militarisation cheaper than he thought.

His whole stance on not caring if Japan has 'nukes', since after all Pakistan and others supposedly have them, suggests an exit strategy to me: Wars are better avoided; great power deters, in his view.

This seems to be a Christian view: J ews love inventing enemies: If Trump is serious, it is possible the world might enter a period of peace. We are now so accustomed to Jews promoting war, that it seems inevitable and natural and unavoidable. But perhaps people aren't as warlike as Jews like. This could go either way: Jews like militarism, and if Trump, as in the Second World War, builds up the USA as an unsinkable aircraft carrier against most of the world, we may get endless new wars.

Trump has started to say he was asked about NATO , and replied that it's obsolete, since the Soviet Union no longer exists. He is quite amusing on full-time, lifelong, 'students' of Nato who fail to notice what it actually does.

Trump seems not to—but may well—understand the Jewish basis for the 'Cold War'. Does he mean he's militaristic in the wrong sense, i. It's impossible to know, but he seems not to have any particular anti-Russian feeling, which sets him apart from Jewish kneejerkers. T rump's architects and structural engineers must have tipped him off as regards planes flying into skyscrapers: If Trump became President, reports about early warning systems, and radar, and interceptions, and the powers of the Jews in control in , would be forced upon his attention.

Saved version of an ADL file. Trump seems to have a high opinion of banks; they do "a good job". Trump must have had huge loans for his buildings, printed by the Jewish money-printing machine. And he must have awareness of the US budget deficit, also Jewish-generated, since Jews lending paper or e-money to central government expect interest at face value—a huge return. B ut there are huge problems. One uneasy problem here is China: And for that matter pollution diminished in China?

I don't know, and the incompetent interviewers wouldn't dare ask anything intelligent: Will countries start to refuse dollars, as Gaddafi did? Will Trump turn his attention to the Federal Reserve, or ask questions about missing gold from Fort Knox?

Yet another example is the US budget. Trump comments that the budget disaster 'flew through' with no debate because of lobbyists, donors, and special interest groups. The Fed has such a huge disproportionate leverage it's not difficult to trace the likely sources of rubber-stamped budgets. Let's hope his advisors will be Jew-aware. Dissent in the different Jewish crime syndicates. Internet has led to an unprecedented awareness of Jews and ZOG regimes. S o Trump may notice unprecedented divisions between the various Jewish factions: For example, however much they hate whites, whites seem to be the only people able to innovate and run things.

Another obvious example is Muslims: Jews and Muslims have often enough historically, been allies against whites and blacks. Yet another example is the obvious hypocrisy of trying to promote nonwhite immigration with no criminal sanctions for whites, but not in Israel. Of course Trump believes, or says he believes, nuclear weapons exist, and thinks there are nuclear holocaust possibilities, though he seems immune to claims that Iran is developing nuclear weapons and therefore ought to be bombed by Americans.

H e also ridicules Iran's 'right to self-inspect', which of course is a mistake, if the traditional post-Hiroshima story is true. The idea of faked nukes is still new to most people look at www.

I'm told some US military or intelligence people know the view is correct and are irritated that Americans didn't seem able to think of it. I hope such people will contact and discuss the issue with Trump. It may help him understand oddities such as Pollard and Bowe Bergdahl. Trump on Iraq Wars. War is profitable to them IF you keep out of the way, can make and profit from expensive equipment, and can force people to pay. The US debtor nation owes money largely to Jews at the Fed.

If goys die, the Jews tribal religion tells them not to care. Trump said "Our country's been losing for so long Trump often says "We should keep the oil - to the victor the spoils of war". But if Jews make more money controlling oil themselves, they may not be interested and will make no attempt to follow such a policy. ISIS [appears to be a Jewish-run outfit of mercenaries and criminals] got the oil.

All this suggests Jewish groups were pro-war. In the same way, Trump says Iraq and Iran have been fighting 'my whole life'. This is an exaggeration. However, he seems unaware that the war could have been made to happen by a greedy, hostile minority, intent on causing instability. At present, 'American' wars are Jewish, with costs offloaded onto US taxpayers, low ranks of US and other troops, and 'goy' soldiers and civilians of many nations.

Maybe Trump wants wars and threats to be American, rather than Jewish. This must make perfect sense to Americans who understand the Jewish issue. Saudi Arabia make 1 billion dollars a day. They should pay us for defense..

Jewish interests may make money from Arabia, and also make money from weapons, all at the expense of Americans.

The situation must be complex, but Trump and his advisors may make discoveries like that. Trump on China and Mexico and Japan. Trump talks about 'our' deficit or the 'US' deficit with China.

W hile the US and others are using up vastly expensive and profitable equipment in a primitive country, the Chinese on the other side of mountains are extracting minerals, for example the 'rare earths'. Trump is baffled by this. But, if there is Jewish banking in China, again, Jews, including those who intermarry with Chinese, enrich themselves while damaging non-Jews in the USA and other countries.

Trump on Control of Materials: As far as I know, Trump hasn't referred in any detail to such things. But it is arguable that Jewish policy has been to gain control of raw materials: He may know about oil, where reserves Saudi Arabia etc , concealed reserves, quality of reserves, and new discoveries Mexico? There's scope for blockades, possibly on a huge scale.

Trump opposes 'Common Core', and dislikes huge graduate debt. B ut these things are soft targets, rather obvious defects. Trump probably has not looked at the hypothesis that Jews want junk education for whites. And also Ivy League education for Jews, without having the wit to understand its poor quality.

Much of US education from has been intentionally bad. If Trump's rapacious mind forays into these regions, serious reforms may result. Jewish Books, Holidays, Ideas, Freakishness. With Internet, many texts for example the Talmud in translation are freely available.

P ossibly Trump's advisors will tip him off about Palestine, Talmudic obscene fanaticism, its history in Russia, 'Russian' read: Jewish oligarchs after about And the effects of Jews on Biblical studies, and the fundamentalists of the United States. But there must be some suspicion that he will get wise to such things. They are not that far removed from techniques used in advertising; he may learn fast.

He may piece together Israeli laws - not comments, but actual Knesset-endorsed laws - forbidding settlement in Israel of Muslims, forbidding 'same sex marriage', forbidding race mixing, and so on. He may find who was behind 'Sanctuary Cities'. And why JFK is hardly mentioned. Maybe he'll awake to the 'Holocaust' fraud, and be enraged. So here is a short list of Trump's closest supports and advisors: Can you spot the pattern?

From 'Just ice' in www. May or may not be on target Note on Roger Stone a 'real political operative' according to Trump, 'a patriot fighting Communism round the world'—except no doubt where it was or is Jewish. We see a blond man, with a receding chin and probably fake tan.

S tone has a website, stonezone. I couldn't help noticing that 'Milhous' is wrongly spelt 'Milhouse' on this supposed expert's site. He has appeared frequently on FOX News. He seems to be one of Trump's entourage of Jews, part of the fake of modern democracy, and no doubt a participant in war crimes and the destruction of many nations. Just Another Jewish member of the Criminal Conspiracy. In this summary, the items in red are my interpretation of Corbyn's imagery, presumably intended to update the 'Jewish' lies of the last few centuries—from as far back as the time of Cromwell, or even earlier.

Contrary to the opinion of many alternative commentators, there are some differences between the British Conservative and Labour Parties. Roughly speaking, the Conservatives are controlled by rich Jews, while the Labour Party is controlled to act for the mass of Jews. On the 'Labour Party', consider its failure to investigate the 'Great War', the BBC's indifference to truth, the absence of any action on financiers, the 'National Government', their Churchill worship, the Jews in trade boards after , the indifference to killings of everyone except Jews, the present-day funding of invaders and lack of help even for people who contributed for life.

The official view of the Labour Party is expressed by Wikipedia: Growing out of the trade union movement and socialist parties of the nineteenth century It had the useful function of providing a 'scapegoat': Aristocrats, churchmen, upper middle classes have largely been victims of taxation, but have not had the insight to investigate to where their assets disappeared.

The 'Labour Party' provides a perfect cover. But the overall Jewish feel is very likely a primitive genetic thing: Hence the planned destruction: At present, Cameron is a face of rich Jews. Note that Scotland is one of the few countries that never expelled Jews.

Cameron is part of a tradition shared with Balfour, of the Agreement , a wealthy Scot who thought the vast hecatombs of the Great War were balanced by the new invader state of Israel. But Labour had a problem after Blair, with Jack Straw and others, flooded Britain with vastly expensive non-whites. The experiment with two Jews, the Milibands, was fortunately unsuccessful.

There must have been a behind-the-scenes operation to pretend Corbyn is new and original; the voting process was clearly rigged, and for example was cheered on by the Jew Dimbleby, with a December BBC Question Time with presumably paid actors hooting for Corbyn. Corbyn allows doubts about Afghanistan. But is happy that Iraq should be ruined, because it could damage 'Jews' and their oil interests and land grab in Palestine.

Presumably he wants Iran destroyed, but as yet neo-cons have failed. It's difficult to judge Iran, because of the supposed nuclear issue. This of course is a major source of money, but primarily of censorship. Whether this will continue remains to be seen. Corbyn wants to deform education with lies if he thinks 'Jews' benefit. This is a new issue to most members of the public. Briefly, Corbyn has to pretend to abolish nuclear weapons; his CND background is useful here.

If you're new to the revisionist nuclear issue, try nukelies. Corbyn follows this policy on auto-pilot. Probably Corbyn will modify his position, perhaps under the pretence he's a 'reformer'. The 'Jewish' purpose is obviously to damage white countries by releasing violent criminals; 'Jews' did the same thing in the Jewish coup in the USSR.

And it's to allow third-world dictatorships, and attacks from the First World. Obviously Corbyn says nothing about 'Jews' invading Palestine, and the mass murders there; the object is to retain stolen land, which he presumably, in his superstitious stupidity, imagines is 'Jewish'. He has a minimum of mock sympathy for Palestinians, to pretend he has a policy. On 'Jews' campaigning against the death penalty, except for themselves, see e.

He implies the scam can continue forever, despite the inevitable inflation in years to come. Corbyn does not mention 'National Debt' which is selectively a sort of 'Jewish' tax. Most people don't realise that 'Jews' make money from loans to central government; they get interest on their junk paper!

Jews WANT more debt. Corbyn is either too stupid or too dishonest to mention this important issue. This explains his ridiculous faith that unlimited immigration can automatically be housed, fed, and so on. All his life he's had paper money, and does not have the intellect to understand real costs of anything.

As the expression goes, he's never done an honest day's work in his life. He doesn't mention, or says little, about Common Purpose, the secretive 'post-democratic' group that arranges corrupt secret deals. When he says 'socialism works! Corbyn may have been pushed in the hope the truth of the USSR has been forgotten. He can wave his red flag, hoping people will forget 'Jews' organising mass murder, with the support of the 'west'. Whether this will work, now that Internet provides some freedom of discussion, remains to be seen, but it certainly looks as though it was part of the push behind him.

However, he says nothing about debt, currency reform, processing the huge debt, the costs of militarism, and the related massive frauds. What grew the seed were comments on my reviews of books by Bertrand Russell. It was obvious 'Marco Buena' had no knowledge of Russell. So why would he make soothing noises about Russell, plus hostile remarks, so far as 'Marco Buena' was capable of making focussed statements, on my reviews of Bertrand Russell?

The clue came to me, very indirectly, from Ludovici's Woman: A Vindication of Ludovici was Rodin's secretary; this is Rodin of 'The Kiss', and of course other sculptures. Ludovici noticed that, before Rodin became famous, Rodin's studio was empty of female visitors. But as his fame spread, their numbers increased. Ludovici's explanation was that women have an earthy nature: Detection of power is evolutionarily useful; taste, intellect, new perceptions, less so.

None of these women could detect, from their own resources, whether Rodin was an artist, or not. And the same must apply to the sayanim, hasbarat, or whatever the genetically-programmed liars call themselves.

They're not interested in creativity, or intellect, or finely-argued explorations. That would be like a cuckoo interesting itself in principles of nest architecture. What Jews want is something like an Index Librorum Prohibitorum in reverse—titles and authors which are Jew-approved.

To take a few examples more or less at random: Well, he was a 'Hungarian Jew' [Jews think: So the Jewish verdict is: What about Benny Hill, part of a TV team making infantile smut? Well, he thought he was a 'Jew'—so, good. How about Colin Firth? He was in an infantile film about an ineffectual monarch—but it supported Jews. What about J M Keynes, the famous economist? Keynes knew about Jews and the money system, but said little if anything about it, even though the 'Fed' immediately preceded the 'Great War'.

So the Jewish verdict: What about Tarantino, who is, or is said to be, the director of an insulting disgusting film related to the Second World War? Well, he conforms to what almost all Jews think is in their interest.

The process is so simple! My initial puzzle is solved. Bertrand Russell was for most of his life a useful idiot, entirely unaware of Jewish malevolence. It's true that towards the end of his life he trod on a few toes—JFK murder, 'nuclear weapons', Vietnam War—but these were controlled by 'friends'. An advantage of the Jewish mindset is that it's so very, very, simple. Others may agonise over justice, truth, equality, fairness and so on, but Jews ignore all that nonsense—they just grab what seems to benefit Jews.

Should Jews support Holocaust liars? Should Jews keep Jewish sex offenders in Israel? Jews see the academic world as desirable, but large numbers of them are stupid; should they shout about each other, fake genuine work, write absurd books?

They manufacture ridiculous views on many subjects, as a disguise for their hatred for whites. Good teaching is difficult—so they pretend to teach. A practical example is laws on secrecy: Most people would agree some privacy is important, for example; but secrecy opens various possibilities for covert violence and secret powers over others. Anyone who watches Jews 'debate' such issues will notice that their sole concern is getting more information out of non-Jews.

Fake expertise by Jews is a serious problem: Worthy Whites The genetic micro-evolution of whites has not, yet, as far as I know, received anything like the attention it deserves. Europe is unique among continents in having geographical barriers—seas, islands, mountains, snow, rivers—which to this day influence the entire area, on the principle that 'good fences make good neighbours'.

And Europe has abundant life, to be exploited, without enormous effort and risk. Dangerous areas need caution—Borneo's 'long houses' were needed in areas of wild jungle life. Whites have evolved specialist groups in farming, building, clothing, water navigation and so on.

Such people must concentrate, and exclude other activities from their minds. Watching a video of men supervising hard disk drives in a Google installation, showed me how similar they are to shepherds, vigilant for hours on end. Perhaps this type of evolution helped steer whites away from the Jewish and Muslim monomania for single 'holy' books. But these Europeans must implicitly assume that other groups have the same interest in working together on the great jigsaw of life.

And genetic inheritance and selection must bring gene pools into a rough balance with their environment. Note that traditional economic theory in Europe tended to believe that smallish specialised groups would work together—though the mechanism, for example the 'invisible hand', was vague.

How fixed is behaviour? Looking at garden birds or insects or for that matter plants, their behaviours remain the same over fantastically large numbers of generations. The problem is that it's invisible: And yet, time after time, it stays constant.

From an evolutionary point of view, this makes perfect sense: There must be some co-evolution between new developments and their control. It's perfectly possible that psychopathy is as fixed as the mechanisms which keep lungs and heart operating.

The brain and its operation is not understood; maybe its effects are as much predetermined as autonomic reactions. Whites Have Genes Too Jews arguably have inherited parasitic genes—refer to this it's in a separate file then return: Personally, I'm a determinist: Whether this is true or not, genetic causes must apply more or less to other races. Whites tend to be fixated on local problems, and need to be good at obeying orders—essential where many people take part in complicated activity which they don't fully understand.

But here they are vulnerable to mimics posing as leaders. But Jews seem to operate on a simple instinct of greed and manipulation. If so, they can subvert and steal and harm. And head the world to disaster. It occurred to me that, however much potential whites have for learning, it's possible this potential can be damaged, and Jews may have evolved parasitic systems to harm learning. Learning may be something which matures at a fixed time; clearly it has to be a method; it's impossible for data, such as language, to be genetically passed on.

Thus we see e. Swedish young kids were never taught anything. The 'look-say' method is calculated to harm children's reading and writing.

The are no explanations of methods used in films, news etc except at a trashy level. Specialisation and its Discontents Other specialisations must have included reading and writing, and drawing, sculpture and ceramics; these are identifiable in ancient Egypt and Greece, in mediaeval guilds, to today.

And military and police skills: Any type of specialisation may, presumably, be perverted away from its fairly natural uses: All this, as is fairly well-known, opens up the possibility of an entire culture being parasitised, though many members may not be aware of what's happening. Even a group with an aristocracy, evolved to optimising all the component groups, necessarily dealing with the many and varied groups which a complicated society must have, is vulnerable.

Some sort of hierarchy, of 'obeying orders', is likely to develop, especially in complicated projects, and can be subverted. Jewish history proves that a fiercely-fanatical network, sharing same genetic type, can be a serious or fatal menace to a society of specialists. This might be deduced from military, engineering, and business models in which concentrated attacks, thin ends of wedges, can lead to victory, demolition, market share, and what not.

The Kevin MacDonald idea whites as liable to pathological altruism clearly does not apply to some white groups. Read true information on white war crimes under Jewish direction if you seriously think whites are 'pathologically altruistic'. At the city, small-scale level, the cases of Leo Frank USA and Jack the Ripper UK and of course many examples throughout Europe show how Jews established de facto immunity for Jewish violence, probably by application of propaganda, bribery, and thuggery.

In each case, vast numbers of whites and others were sucked in, so the allocation of blame or praise, if you like war isn't simple. It's an important question as to whether aggression is genetic and inherent in whites, or men, or all people, or all animals for that matter; or whether the genes for specialist activity in whites were exploited. To this day, many US veterans have raped, murdered, butchered, and burnt alive people about whom they knew nothing, and still know nothing, as an outcome of unremitting lies.

Americans have ruined and wasted countries around the world. I'd suggest there's an equivalent, among whites, of the relentless fierce narrow-mindedness of 'Sayanim', is groupings which are themselves specialist and parasitic. A perfect example is the Church of England in the s. Until about , half the entire output of Oxbridge graduates went into the C of E.

Their net contribution to intellectual life was, if anything, negative; and their net economic contribution was negative. While the Victorian world developed, in both good and bad ways, archbishops, bishops, and vicars stayed much the same. They were the BBC broadcasters of the time, issuing their official messages on Sundays.

Arguably, a modern equivalent is the Professoriat, with the odd combination of strutting self-confidence, built on the shifting sands of imposed Jewish opinions. So far Professoriats have been buttressed by the power to weed out underlings bringing disagreeable truths. All this is obvious enough to anyone who has witnessed the post expansion of universities.

But and I may be wrong here some of the Professoriat are feeling restless, in the way vicars who one example led to women's deaths in childbirth by opposing contraception. In a world in which war deaths must total at least million per century, and false flags and other hoaxes, such as the 'Holocaust', are obvious enough to any researcher, and democracy is mostly a sham—shouldn't these people perhaps do a bit?

We urge you to turn off your ad blocker for The Telegraph website so that you can continue to access our quality content in the future. Visit our adblocking instructions page.

Home News Sport Business. There's a surprisingly simple way to destroy the cult of Corbyn: Britain's wretched civil service is medievally enslaved to EU masters Quentin Letts.

European courts risk corroding free speech to create special status for Islam Tim Stanley. Can we please return to an age in which Britain had a sense of humour? The public have a right to know when the powerful seek to gag the vulnerable Telegraph View. Letters to the Editor. Parliamentary privilege can play a vital role in exposing abuse of power Premium. Ignore our colleagues' beauty parades, Chancellor, and deliver a truly Conservative budget Priti Patel.

Our attitudes to sex and swearing show how very modern it is to be Victorian Charles Moore. Britain shouldn't tie itself into a voiceless pact with an EU that is changing fast Juliet Samuel.

If we needed proof that MeToo is far from over, then this week was it Claire Cohen. A Norway-style Brexit should be enough for a country as divided as ours Tom Harris. Plenty of Tories want Theresa May's job, but could they secure a better Brexit deal?

Anybody up for some chat? Housewives wants sex tonight VA Ivor Chocolate ice cream and pizza. Gardiner, Felix FWB Big girls do it better!! m4w Looking for female for casual meeting or ongoing FWB. Normal,single DDF and. Lady wants casual sex Rifle, grannies search girls on cam, sexy married women wanting women who want fucking. my fuck buddy Gardiner woman search get sex tonight, married women looking for men Missoula Montana Casual Hook . Lonely moms wants iam looking for sex. Discreet relationship Gardiner Montana. Morning Workout EG looking for new family Cute girl looking for older man.