The Blue Pill.

[guohua]

@"BIAD"  WoW!!
She Exposed The Clinton News Network and Lived?
Don't anyone Disclose the location of Her Bunker.

[BIAD]

@"BIAD"  WoW!!
She Exposed The Clinton News Network and Lived?
Don't anyone Disclose the location of Her Bunker.

It never occurred to me that CNN were just a voice for anyone with the money
who wanted spin for any particular subject! Gaawd, I'd like to see their finance
books... not the ones they show officialdom, though!

[BIAD]

This is how it starts... a non-country, bureaucratic group with an ideological agenda with
it's eye on having it's own army. Thank God Germany  is not involv... er.

France to push for European Army NOW as it pushes Germany for more EU integration.

'France will ask its European Union allies to push ahead with joint defence projects
-as the country steps up its backing for an EU army.

The new Armed Forces Minister Sylvie Goulard announced her intention to get closer to
Germany over new President Emmanuel Macron's fears countries will start to look after
their own interests, and not those of the bloc.



Goulard, a European expert, took the control of the renamed defence ministry last week.
Mr Macron is set on pushing for greater defence integration.

Ms Goulard said in her first message to military and civilian personnel: "I am attached to
making European defence projects move forward. "Some elements already exist, but others
still need to be conceived and developed to better ensure our security in these times of
interdependence. 
“To achieve this effort, work with Germany will be decisive."

A European lawmaker who speaks four languages, Goulard is respected in Brussels as a
straight talker, having acted as adviser to former European Commission president Romano
Prodi.

A close ally of Macron, she ranks fourth in the government hierarchy, and becomes only the
second woman to head the ministry, which reverts to its pre-1974 name of Ministry of the
Armed Forces.

Goulard also said she wanted to ensure that Franco-British security and defence cooperation
did not suffer from the decision to leave the European Union.

An advocate of closer EU integration, Macron backs a "multi-speed" Europe, an idea that
has earned growing support in Germany and other EU countries since Britain voted to leave
the bloc.

In the past, France has tended to be seen by allies as an intransigent, go-it-alone power
because of its military interventions in arenas like Libya, the Middle East and the Sahel.

Nineteen countries including France, Germany, Italy and Spain be in talks from next month
on the so-called Cooperative Financial Mechanism, or CFM.

The joint fund, financed national governments, would be the third part of a payment plan
involving a proposed research facility led by the European Commission, the EU executive,
and money from the EU's common budget for defence...'
SOURCE:

But... to counter the above article, The Telegraph produced this on the same day (Saturday)

New EU army headquarters branded little more than a 'call centre'

'A much-touted EU military headquarters set to be launched in the coming days has been
dismissed as a "call centre" that will be staffed by "eight to nine people" with other jobs.

EU foreign affairs chief Federica Mogherini confirmed this week that a so-called Military
Planning and Conduct Capability (MPCC) facility would finally be formally launched in a
few days.

Although the UK blocked the creation of the EU military unit this week, objecting to use
of the words “operational HQ" in the text, there was scant concern about its remit, said
a Whitehall source.

“The so-called ‘HQ’ amounts to eight or nine people all of whom have existing jobs and
will come together to work with the existing general who heads EU military.
It’s about as low-ambition as you can get away with," he told The Telegraph...'
SOURCE:

[BIAD]

I'm becoming a little confused now... if CNN is deemed an outlet that allegedly reports fake news
and supposedly has a biased leaning towards the Hillary group, then how does the article below
work?!

It's even more confusing that such a world famous media doesn't understand how it's currently
portraying itself by attempting to display such a sh*t-poor story in a rational light!
Mr. Comey's behavior is important considering the position he held and in general, I'd suggest
many have lost faith -not just in the ex-Director and his actions, but the agency he represented.

If this conflicted situation continues, the idea that a Russian intrusion can just take over an election
without being held accountable could seriously effect the perception of other countries around the
world that's supposed to look at the USA for democracy-orientated leadership!

I'm certainly not doubting CNN's zeal to bring this piece to the public's eye, but surely come on...
the explanation CNN is offering should really involve large floppy shoes, a squirty flower and a tiny car
that has it's doors blow off!

Sources: Comey acted on Russian intelligence he knew was fake.

'Washington (CNN)Then-FBI Director James Comey knew that a critical piece of information relating
to the investigation into Hillary Clinton's email was fake -created by Russian intelligence -- but he feared
that if it became public it would undermine the probe and the Justice Department itself, according to
multiple officials with knowledge of the process...'

If a 'critical piece of information' is fake, then it isn't critical... it's just fake.
If a piece of information deemed critical -states that a nuclear missle is heading to New York and
after investigating, it's found it's false, then it's false. A department checks it out, discovers it's not
true and then maybe, looks into where it came from.
You don't keep it and call it critically unreal important information to the public!

'...As a result, Comey acted unilaterally last summer to publicly declare the investigation over -without
consulting then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch -while at the same time stating that Clinton had been
"extremely careless" in her handling of classified information...'

The only merit here is that Hillary Clinton mis-handled classified information and not critically fake
information... Jeez, this situation is really showing how dumbed-down people are!

'...His press conference caused a firestorm of controversy and drew criticism from both Democrats
and Republicans.
Comey's actions based on what he knew was Russian disinformation offer a stark example of the way
Russian interference impacted the decisions of the highest-level US officials during the 2016 campaign...'

And it was these 'highest-level US officials' who voted in the current President?! Seriously?!
Comey knew it was fake information and by giving it to whoever these US Officials are, he what...?
forgot to tell them it was bunk?! The fake information 'impacted' on decisions because it was false!
London Bridge for sale, guys!

'...The Washington Post reported Wednesday that this Russian intelligence was unreliable.
US officials now tell CNN that Comey and FBI officials actually knew early on that this intelligence was
indeed false...'


'...In fact, acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe went to Capitol Hill Thursday to push back on the notion
that the FBI was duped, according to a source familiar with a meeting McCabe had with members of the
Senate intelligence committee...'
SOURCE:

Send in the clowns.

[guohua]

@"BIAD" I know,,, I'm waiting for them to put up their Big Top Tent and Bring Out More Clowns, Yes and those other Dancing Dogs in Tutu's (news-casters) to entertain the Brain Dead Masses some more. 

[BIAD]

Here's a fine display of deflection that only seems to be used when the 'PC Brigade' don't wish
to upset certain parties that have been in the UK news lately.

Of course, it's a tragedy and maybe the Journalist wishes to steer the reader away from information
that might upset someone with a gentle nature, but the meagre facts still imply something more sinister
than just a domestic incident.

The title of the article from the BBC is eye-catching and anyone perusing the article would tick that off
that information and assume it had no real connection to the account of the deaths. But life has this way
of offering dots that our minds tend to enjoy connecting.

But what struck me how the writer moves away from the actual reason for the article and elaborates
on John Lennon's life. Why...? 

Liverpool deaths: Three bodies found in John Lennon's former flat.

'The bodies of a woman and two children have been found at a flat in Liverpool that
John Lennon lived in.



Police were called to a ground floor flat on Falkner Street, near Toxteth, Liverpool shortly before 19:30
BST on Tuesday. A man, 30, was detained on suspicion of murder before being taken to hospital after
falling ill.
Merseyside Police believe the incident was domestic in nature. It said it was not looking for anyone else...'

Okay. A terrible incident where a suspect for the deaths became ill.
It's happened before. Shock, stress through guilt can effect the body enough that hospitalisation can
be sometimes necessary. It's always awful when children are involved, the comment from the Police
that they're not looking for anyone else smacks of a private -but odd killing.

But there maybe more information further on to possibly help the reader get a handle on this strange story.

'...A police spokesman said tests were being carried out on a substance found at the scene.
The arrested man was taken to hospital before being discharged and taken to a police station for
questioning.
The force added a post-mortem examination will be carried out to establish the causes of death...'

Hmmm, a substance... it could be that this 'stuff' had somehow effected the male who's being held
by the authorities. Whatever caused the suspect to become ill seemes to have eased after his visit to
hospital and mentioning a post-mortem to discover what killed the woman and children, usually means
the cause of the deaths isn't obvious.

'...Neighbours said the property in the Georgian Quarter was regularly visited by Beatles fans on tours
of the city. The flat was once owned by the band's manager, Brian Epstein, and Lennon lived there with
his first wife Cynthia shortly after they married in 1962...'

Yes, interesting. Is Mr. Epstein, John Lennon or 'Cynthia' relevant to the dead people, the substance or
the incident on the whole? No...? Just a tid-bit, heh? Please stay on topic, this might be something to
do with what happened in nearby Manchester and involve an air-borne lethal gas.

'... A neighbour, who did not want to be named, said: "The tours are always stopping at the house because
John Lennon used to live there." He said a family with two young children had lived in the flat.
"I didn't know them, I just knew there was a family living there. The children were toddler age," he said...'

This quiet family seemed to have chosen an abode where you'd have tourists oggling about and even
possibly encroaching on the young family's privacy. That's a shame really, but I'm sure this wouldn't cause
a man to slay his partner and two toddlers in an unknown manner.
I wouldn't think so, anyway.

'...Properties on the street were evacuated because of concerns over a gas leak but residents have been
allowed back into their homes, said police. Falkner Street and Catharine Street were closed but the roads
have since reopened.

One woman said: "The police said we had a couple of minutes to get out of the house.
"There were ambulances, fire engines and police here. We weren't allowed back in until about 11pm."
Detectives are appealing for anyone who may have information to contact them...'

Yes, at first-glance, one would guess it could be a gas-leak, but the mention of an interesting 'substance'
hints that a utility may not be at fault. Like most countries around the world, the gas comes into the building
via protected pipes, there's no substance involved.

I'd dare to suggest there's more here than meets the eye and I'll wager the BBC realise that too.
Onward with this intrepid report!

'...John Lennon, who was born in Liverpool in 1940, divorced Cynthia in 1968 and married Yoko Ono
the following year. He was murdered by Mark Chapman, who shot him on 8 December 1980, in New York...'

Yes-yes, Lennon and the rest of the Fab-Four certainly had an effect in the music world and honestly think
another fluff-piece on The Beatles would be an interesting read. But this tragedy, do you know anythink about
the family...? Any investigative journalism taking place?

'...Tour guide Jay Riley, 67, stopped outside the property earlier while taking tourist David McGann, 35,
from Melbourne, on The Beatles Fab Four taxi tour.

He said: "This is where John and Cynthia, his first wife, spent their honeymoon and where he wrote the
song Do You Want to Know a Secret...'

What the hell..?! Where did this tour guide come from?! Is he an integral part of the unfortunate account?
The guy who was sick and being held in regard of the deaths, anymore on him? Anymore on the 'substance'?

'..."The reason he wrote the song Do You Want to Know a Secret is because this was Brian Epstein's
secret apartment. "Brian Epstein was gay and up until 1967 in England it was illegal to be gay.
He added: "This is why it was called his secret apartment." Mr Riley said he visits the flat about twice a
day on tours...'
SOURCE:



I'll take a guess that this grim incident involves a family of a certain ethnicity and if we take a look at
the local paper... we see this below. The BBC are willfully omitting information due to Government-urged
advice not to 'imply' the terrorist danger is still ongoing.


THE LIVERPOOL ECHO:

[BIAD]

Snopes call 'FALSE' that CNN faked their video after London atrocity and give their reasons.

Here's another fine illustration of how the establishment backs up one of it's many tentacles when
they are accidentally exposed for misleading the public. To succeed in such battles for the minds of
the Blue-Pilled, one has to remember that answering an accusation head-on must only be done on
one's own turf.
And only within a chosen narrative.

Some people on the internet comment that the CNN video of a group of Muslim women, men
and children have been brought in by the film crew to create a false narrative and others have
stated that the whole scene looks staged due to the preparation being fimed by a third party.
before the CNN footage was actually broadcast.

So is it both, one or the other or neither? Snopes is supposed to be your guide to truth and
lies in the media world, so let's see why they judged the accusations as false.


...................................................

SNOPES:

From a Markantro Tweet
''Note the white police officers leaving before the CNN shot & the Asian officers coming in.
They then left after they went off air!''

'The claims spread widely from there, with right-leaning American blog Gateway Pundit leading
the charge in presenting it as an example of “fake news” in the making...'

Okay... straight out of the gate, Snopes is using the word 'claims' which means they can now
force the reader into an area where their own chosen 'claim' can be used. They should answer
each of the multiple claims to prove the whole incident true or false, but when you can pick your
weapon, you stand a better chance to win your particular battle.

'...According to multiple versions of the rumor, the Twitter user (@Markantro) happened across the
scene of CNN’s staging or fabricating a report on Muslims’ protesting the attacks in London.
But nothing suggested that CNN “staged” the demonstrations to any extent greater than engaging
protesters, directing their positions, and asking them questions as part of a news segment...'

Now Snopes is condensing several claims and apart from diluting the claims by using the word 'rumour'
(I used the English version!), they're implying that this 'Markantro' just happened to be record the incident
because he was passing by.

Yet, the footage is taken from a position from within another film-crew which I believe from recall, is
either the BBC or Sky News.
So in my opinion, that implication is debatable. Tut-tut, Snopes, your narrative is dripping from the
corners!

Apparently, there's no suggestion of a staged incident because asking protestors and Police to be
positioned behind a Police-cordoned area, arranging the people to stand in a line and having a
crew-member in the group set-up a centralling for the camera isn't 'staging'!

The actions of the woman from another film-crew requesting that a young girl to move out of another
company's camera-shot shows that this isn't spontaneous. If a group of people had just happened to
cross a line of a prohibited area to protest peacefully or otherwise, would have been a news item in
itself!

If it's done with an agreement with the Police and seemingly only for the CNN crew, then by definition,
it's artificial and on the here on the mainland, we call it staged.

'...Those spreading the rumor claimed that the same person appeared in different videos wearing the
same unique pink trousers, a dead giveaway that the person was a “paid protester.”
However, rumor-mongers did not elaborate as to why multiple photographs of the same protester
indicated perfidy rather than multi-outlet coverage of the same protest....'

(Perfidy means the state of being deceitful and untrustworthy)

Then they must be liars and this is enough to cancel out all of the claims?
Yes, after that weak section of Snopes' narrative above, this could certainly help by calling one's
oppostion 'rumour-mongers' and pushing that the claim is false based on a supposed rational
alternative.

If the same protesters were filmed in another location by a different news-outlet, then this would
validate them as genuine protesters because... what? They move...? They cannot remain behind
the cordoned-off area?!

Did these alleged rumour-mongers really not elaborate or did you not investigate further...?
Are CNN so morally beyond approach that you just accept what they say at face-value?!

All questions that the established media ride rough-shod over because of their assumption that
everything you see and hear from them you will accept as the truth. It's the same with 'unnamed
sources' and please, don't get me going on that malarkey!

'...The Daily Wire similarly speculated that the demonstrations were wholly falsified by CNN rather
than simply reported on:
"CNN International (CNNi) staged a backdrop of persons — presumably Muslims, including women
in hijabs — during a Sunday news segment in London regarding the previous evening’s mass murder
Islamic terrorist attack in the U.K. capital.

CNNi likely sought to hype a narrative of widespread Muslim opposition to the Islamic State (ISIS) and
Islamic terrorism, more broadly.
Video captured by Twitter user @markantro shows CNNi’s Becky Anderson directing the ostensibly
anti-jihad Muslims to appear as backdrops for a live segment."...'

The footage does bear this out and any rational person would not naturally assume that just because
a horse as black-and-white stripes on it's skin that it's a zebra! So why would a sceptical person naturally
assume these people were Muslims...?
Is it that the narrative must be maintained that CNN is an established information outlet that cannot be
doubted?

Any suggestion on what 'directing' means when placed against the word 'staged'?
Maybe Becky Anderson knows.

But... if Snopes can kill this claim off, then surely the question of uncertainty regarding the whole incident
can be quashed.

So Snopes went for the 'Let-you-know-a-behind-the-scenes-secret' approach.
If a person is on the outside and is suspicious of something, then the best way to get them to accept one's
narrative is to bring them within the circle of an assumed secrecy.

This involves half-trues, rational sentencing and an over-all feeling of 'well, everyone knows this and accepts
it as normal, so as not to be an outsider, you have to accept it too'
It creates empowerment and if structured carefully, it can take someone who was dubious and make them
a willing ally who can respond in a debate with confidence due to the action of weaponising them with your
own arms!

So we get this:

'...For those not familiar with live news production, it is actually not that uncommon for hosts
and producers to arrange protesters or pedestrians behind reporter to provide a varied
background.

Sources familiar with this live shoot tell Mediaite that the protesters (“Muslim Mothers”) were
already very near the location and the Police simply allowed them to move behind Ms.
Anderson and crew.

That said, there is reason to fairly critique this as “editorializing” the shoot and not just reporting
the news. And in a climate where CNN is feeling a lot of criticism  -most of which is unfounded 
-from the conservative corners of the Internet, this footage won’t help their cause...'

There's the 'this is how the magician does it' explanation that CNN could have offered at the beginning of their
London Killing footage and yet.... didn't. And there's also a couple of half-truths thrown in to make sure Snopes
is seen to come-off as fair.

To make sure the required response is accepted, the victor in a debate can lay the groundwork for future acts
of convincement by posing as a 'fellow-loser'... a case of 'Oh I know what it feels like, we're very much the same'
With the use of this tactic, the persons who believed CNN were evil story-twisters has not only been persuaded
that the claim is false, they have become aligned by condescending benevolence and the reinforcement of the
'you're part of the in-group' mentality is echoed to indicate the wanted narrative prevails.

'...CNN also provided a statement about the rumors terming them to be “nonsense”:

''This story is nonsense. The group of demonstrators that was at the police cordon was being
allowed through by officers so they could show their signs to the gathered media.
The CNN crew along with other media present simply filmed them doing so...''
(Please note CNN: the wording is were' when referring to a group and not 'was')

They denied it!
I would have been more agreeable with CNN if they had admitted to the staging in
the name of assisting in healing wounds in societies through this action.
But that would've meant showing that they manipulate information for their reasons.

'...A source at CNN said that the reporters and equipment seen in the third-party video represented
several news organizations, not just CNN, situated in front of a police cordon near London Bridge.

The small group of Muslims at the demonstration (actually a vigil, according to the participants,
who were there of their own volition) asked police for permission to cross the police barrier to be
photographed.

The police assented and escorted them into position.
The shot was “arranged” only to the extent necessary to fit the group into the camera frame...'

Well, I'm not going for the low-fruit that by stating the Police escorting them into position shows an arrangement
of some-sort. Was it the Police who asked the protesters to pass under the ribbon?!

But the people holding the banners were requested to move into the scene by someone who didn't wear a police
uniform and the act of another 'third party' crew member to ask the protesing group to move out of their own camera
shot implies not all the news organisations were in on the controlled scene.

Finally...
'...A CNN source told us:
We were in the middle of a live show when they appeared, and they moved in front of us so we could see their signs
-for people to suggest that the protest was staged by the media is ludicrous...'

So the Police didn't ask the protesters to come beyond the restriction barrier and the protesters didn't ask to stand
where they could be seen... then how did this occur and who benefitted by having their cameras directly positioned in
front of the group of vigil participants? 

A guess anyone...? It begins with 'C'!
Thank you Snopes.

[Daitengu]

Fucking amazing ..... people relying on a soros funded group snopes to tell them if something is true .....  ahh well .... carry on with getting ya daily dosage of soros funded propaganda .....

[BIAD]

Fucking amazing ..... people relying on a soros funded group snopes to tell them if something is true .....  ahh well .... carry on with getting ya daily dosage of soros funded propaganda .....

Oh that's where they go and that's why I always check the site for the establishment reinforcement from Snopes.
It stinks.

[Mystic Wanderer]

Great post @"BIAD".    

DOWN WITH SNOPES!

[BIAD]

Great post @"BIAD".    

DOWN WITH SNOPES!

I listened to an interview with the young man that goes with the Twitter-name 'Markantro'
and he was saying that it was true that he was passing by with his girlfriend when the pair
saw the staging.

He added that as Becky Anderson -who initially stood to once side, began explaining about
the 'appearance' of the group of people with signs, Mark commented that this was because
CNN put them there to a BBC crew member!
(I quietly placed a bet with myself it was the Beeb!)

The female crew member, the same one who was waving the young girls out of the BBC
backdrop, laughed with Mark and it seemed CNN's staging behavior was frowned upon by
other people involved in that broadcasting situation.

CNN... it makes you wonder what falsehoods they've created in the past.

Edit: Oh before I forget... f*ck Snopes.

[Mystic Wanderer]

https://youtu.be/X_kliZkB4Fg

[BIAD]

https://youtu.be/X_kliZkB4Fg

I'll take a look. Thanks me-dears!

[BIAD]

They fly so high above us, we -the little people, can only wonder what terrible responsibilities
they're burdened with.

How do you get over losing your job as an MP?

'How long does it take to get over the shock of losing your job as an MP? A year, two days?
Inevitably some MPs - such as former Liberal Democrat leader Nick Clegg and former SNP
leader Alex Salmond - found themselves out of a job in the early hours of this morning - and
it can be tough to take.

A study by the Open University Business School didn't beat about the bush when summing
up just how difficult it can be for some MPs to leave office.
It included an anonymous quote from one former MP, who said: "It was like a bereavement,
and it was, but there was no funeral."

In the same study, Baroness Jowell, who stood down at the 2015 election after 23 years as
the MP for Dulwich and West Norwood, explained why it can be such a terrible shock to the
system.

"As an elected politician, you are always switched on and feel the responsibility for your
electorate day and night. This is not easy to give up."...'
SOURCE:
.................................
My word, it must be a nightmare for these people!!
It seems that all the coal-miners who lost their jobs during the Thatcher years -which brought
hardship and poverty to communties that sole reason for being there was the mining industry,
had it easy!

The steel-workers and ship-builders in my own region must have been giddy with joy when
their own respective industries were destroyed, they had no idea what people like Baroness
Jowell would be going through.

The working-class will never understand that to lose one's position in the Government is a far
greater loss that someone losing an income for their families!!
No... the masses will never know what it's like to never be able to bring your pooch into the
office again on 'Bring-A-Pet' Day or lose the right to travel to Europe on a useless junket.

Because everyone works in an office, right? (Forgive the above sarcsm)

This is the people the UK election was all about. The middle-class were the prime target
for both the Conservative and the Labour Party. The vote was about London and the 'fairly
well-off'... the same ones who quietly protest in the capital and haven't a clue about the
European Union, they were after the snowflakes.

The same BBC were discussing the fallout of the election on Saturday morning -with two
farmers and one of them employed around 400 migrant workers. This chap owned a strawberry
company (farmer?!)... and explained that many Indian, Pakistani, Polish and Albanian workers'
jobs were now in jeopardy because of 'Brexit'
By the way, he was wearing a suit.

One can only wonder why Indian and Pakistanis -not of the EU, would travel so far from their
native homes to pick strawberries for a minimum wage. Unless... no, I can't say that.

It is these migrant workers that the election ignored, like it or not, it was these people, construction
workers, hospital cleaners, shelf-stackers, trash collectors and anyone who didn't hover around a
water-cooler at break-time, that were beyond the major parties purviews.

The Conservatives were always for the wealthy. That might be a bland statement as anyone who
puts in the work and focuses on accumulating money, could fall under that headng. But it's not just
the amount in your bank-balance that counts... it's an aloofness that comes from a Britishness that
many Brits are not allowed to have.

Labour -the party built to represent the blue-collar worker, has morphed into a happy-go-lucky group
of 'Conservative-Lite' that know that someone fills the shelves of their up-market store or makes the
commuter trains work, but it's more interesting to talk about reasonable debate when dealing with
a nuclear missle heading towards the British Isles.

We've become softies... the kids that the rough boys pushed out of the way and if we're not careful,
a bigger rough-boy will make us cry.

[guohua]

They fly so high above us, we -the little people, can only wonder what terrible responsibilities
they're burdened with.

How do you get over losing your job as an MP?

'How long does it take to get over the shock of losing your job as an MP? A year, two days?
Inevitably some MPs - such as former Liberal Democrat leader Nick Clegg and former SNP
leader Alex Salmond - found themselves out of a job in the early hours of this morning - and
it can be tough to take.

A study by the Open University Business School didn't beat about the bush when summing
up just how difficult it can be for some MPs to leave office.
It included an anonymous quote from one former MP, who said: "It was like a bereavement,
and it was, but there was no funeral."

In the same study, Baroness Jowell, who stood down at the 2015 election after 23 years as
the MP for Dulwich and West Norwood, explained why it can be such a terrible shock to the
system.

"As an elected politician, you are always switched on and feel the responsibility for your
electorate day and night. This is not easy to give up."...'
SOURCE:
.................................
My word, it must be a nightmare for these people!!
It seems that all the coal-miners who lost their jobs during the Thatcher years -which brought
hardship and poverty to communties that sole reason for being there was the mining industry,
had it easy!

The steel-workers and ship-builders in my own region must have been giddy with joy when
their own respective industries were destroyed, they had no idea what people like Baroness
Jowell would be going through.

The working-class will never understand that to lose one's position in the Government is a far
greater loss that someone losing an income for their families!!
No... the masses will never know what it's like to never be able to bring your pooch into the
office again on 'Bring-A-Pet' Day or lose the right to travel to Europe on a useless junket.

Because everyone works in an office, right? (Forgive the above sarcsm)

This is the people the UK election was all about. The middle-class were the prime target
for both the Conservative and the Labour Party. The vote was about London and the 'fairly
well-off'... the same ones who quietly protest in the capital and haven't a clue about the
European Union, they were after the snowflakes.

The same BBC were discussing the fallout of the election on Saturday morning -with two
farmers and one of them employed around 400 migrant workers. This chap owned a strawberry
company (farmer?!)... and explained that many Indian, Pakistani, Polish and Albanian workers'
jobs were now in jeopardy because of 'Brexit'
By the way, he was wearing a suit.

One can only wonder why Indian and Pakistanis -not of the EU, would travel so far from their
native homes to pick strawberries for a minimum wage. Unless... no, I can't say that.

It is these migrant workers that the election ignored, like it or not, it was these people, construction
workers, hospital cleaners, shelf-stackers, trash collectors and anyone who didn't hover around a
water-cooler at break-time, that were beyond the major parties purviews.

The Conservatives were always for the wealthy. That might be a bland statement as anyone who
puts in the work and focuses on accumulating money, could fall under that headng. But it's not just
the amount in your bank-balance that counts... it's an aloofness that comes from a Britishness that
many Brits are not allowed to have.

Labour -the party built to represent the blue-collar worker, has morphed into a happy-go-lucky group
of 'Conservative-Lite' that know that someone fills the shelves of their up-market store or makes the
commuter trains work, but it's more interesting to talk about reasonable debate when dealing with
a nuclear missle heading towards the British Isles.

We've become softies... the kids that the rough boys pushed out of the way and if we're not careful,
a bigger rough-boy will make us cry.

The Liberals will never allow them to reopen coal mines our steel factories. Besides, The Paris Climate Accord Will Not Allow Any Western Country to Employ Their Population unless it's a Green Job like, installing Solar Panels in a Country with,,, Oh, They don't do the number of Days with sun shine in the UK, they do Hours?!
That would be, The UK as a whole averages 1493 hours of sun a year.
Is that Ideal for Solar Panels? May not be a full time job.

I guess there is Wind Turbines, I've heard the UK is Windy.
But, then you'll have to deal with the Death of Birds and Bees.

Nope, I think Obama  and the Pope and Al Gore have Screwed You Really Good with the Paris Climate Accord.
China and India will have their population working and their Economy Growing, your Countries Populations will be On The Government Take and Suffering. 
JMHO

[BIAD]

In regards of economics of the UK, one of main restrictions imposed by the European Union
was in the fishing industry. We're an island and many boats from Portugal and other countries
can fish just a few hundred yards off the British coast.
But in many places along our own coastline, we can't!

The reality of solar-power in the Britain is ridiculous and if there was one area where exporting
a product would be profitable, is rainwater!! A few years ago, we were actually trucking water from
reservoirs near me in the north to the lower areas in the south.

A BBC website shows a general pattern of subsidence of 1-2mm a year in the London area and
even though the Thames Barrier -a mechanism designed and built from a company of my hometown,
is stopping the flooding from the river, it still needs water.

For the traditional industries of coal and steel, we were told it was a dumping of cheap steel from
the Chinese onto the market that caused the closure of the Redcar Steelworks and the almost closure
of Port Talbot in Wales.

The coal-mining is all-but dead. There's 26 open-cast mines still open, but the last deep mine closed
in 2015. This means that the original settlements that grew-up around the pits fell into despair and with
no other industry available, became sad impoverished villages and towns.
Of course, London wasn't effected.

We could invest more in wind-power, the North Sea and The Irish Sea have fields of windmills sitting
just off the shore. Well, why not...? It's not like we can fish there!!
But I'm sure the bluster that politicians produce could be put into better effect and keep the country
running. Just don't ask them to do any serious work to assist that!

[BIAD]

Meanwhile, back in the Blue-Pill world...

MSNBC May Have ‘Randomly’ Interviewed Obama Campaign Aide.



'MSNBC conducted street interviews Saturday to get reactions from “everyday folks” about
James Comey’s recent Senate testimony, but they appear to have snuck in a top Obama
campaign aide.

Late in Saturday’s show, host Richard Lui turned the broadcast over to NBC News’ Jinah Kim,
who was in Los Angeles, CA snagging street interviews with local residents.

Among those interviewed were a woman who recently moved to the U.S. from the U.K.,
a tourist visiting LA from Kansas City, MO — and a possible Obama campaign aide.

“Where there’s smoke, there’s fire, and the fact that he would make a very specific request
to have everybody else leave the office so that he would be alone with Comey, for me,
speaks volumes,” a woman named Alma Marquez, identified only as a “Los Angeles Resident,”
said during the segment.

Oddly enough, Marquez looks eerily similar to the same Alma Marquez who served as the CA
Latino vote director for Obama’s campaign in 2008 and describes herself as a “community
and political strategist.”



While it’s not confirmed that it’s the same person, looking at pictures side by side makes it
seem highly suspect. Here is a photo of the Ms. Marquez, who worked for Obama (on the far
left, next to famed feminist Gloria Steinem):



Those glasses look pretty similar.
Many have already accused networks like MSNBC and CNN of gaming “random” interviews by
sneaking in experienced politicos. Richard Lui’s insistence that they were interviewing
“everyday folks” Saturday while having on an Obama campaign aide and political strategist
could further tarnish their credibility.

MSNBC and Alma Marquez did not answer requests for comment...'
The Daily Caller:

[BIAD]

In regards of the Blue Pill and it's advantages of keeping you in a false environment of equanimity, it may help
those who have forego the dosage to understand the different shades of blue that can be found along the
shelf of docious-societal panacea.

In the United Kingdom, one of the main medicines is patriotism to the Crown, the centuries-old loyalty to
the King or Queen of that country. Recently, the media of Britain... England mainly, have offered articles that
suggest polls are showing a rise in this need to feel safe under the watchful gaze of an imperialist.

So in another fluff-piece to cater for the Royals and to make the rare English summer seem a little rosier for
the once-working-class-now-middle-class folk in their small back-gardens, a person with the title 'News Reporter'
rehashes a little bit of celebrity-gossip from the Newsweek magazine and adds a lot of commentary.

But to show that this type of Blue Pill isn't just wasted on  the generations that that can say they knew someone
that was in 'the World War' (the second one!)... this latest saphire-hued lozenge is flavoured for the youth of
today.

Prince William, his wife and two children have served their purpose in the Royal public relation services and
shown to their lowly followers that commitment in all it social family-orientated forms is the right way to go.
A two-parent family is offered as a 'good' thing and as tradition and commonsense indicate, it makes for a
more solid, healthy foundation of a nation.

'But what about the rebel young...?' -I hear you ask, what about those young men that haven't found their feathered
-hat-wearing soul-mate whilst perusing the paddock of Royal Ascot horse-racing or watching a game of Polo from
the tartan-blanketed tail-gate of their Range Rover?
Ah... that's where Prince Harry comes in and please, forgive my earlier snobbery.

Remember, we're not just dealing with young men and women who're struggling to house their children or just
finding ways to outwit the person behind the Welfare Claims desk for more money. Harry's not only speaking to
the homeless glue-sniffers or migrating Europeans hiding in squalour or the shoeless worshipper in a Mosque.

We're reaching out to those in our society who poo-poo such silly notions of monarchy and show their displeasure
of being ruled by another by marching in the capital city on a workday. Harry is gently whispering to the millennials,
Generation X and Z, the young who perceive the world through their I-Phones and believe communism is similar to
how Fred Kite in the movie 'I'm Alright, Jack' identified it.
"Ahhh, Russia. All them corn fields and ballet in the evening."

The second of Prince Charles and the late-Lady Diana's offspring -or the spare future king, if you like, can be
found promoting the idea of British sovereignty in this article below.

However, to make the piece more enticing -and failing dramatically in my view, Andy Hayes, the 'News Reporter'
decides to have a headline that is irrelevent to what the ginger-haired Prince is actually saying.
..........................................
SOURCE:
Prince Harry: No one in the Royal Family wants to be King or Queen.

'The Prince has also spoken about walking behind his mother's coffin, saying: "I don't think
any child should be asked to do that."



Prince Harry has suggested that no one in the Royal Family wants to take over from the Queen.
Interviewed by Newsweek magazine, Harry said: "Is there any one of the Royal Family who wants
to be King or Queen? I don't think so, but we will carry out our duties at the right time."...'

Well, I would suggest this statement is open to interpretation. In the realms of a monarchy, one doesn't state that
they should be ruler if it involved usurping the line of succession. And before the reader thinks I'm over-reacting or
nit-picking, I would also suggest a lesson in sovereign governance could assist in this adult-form of social control.

But it's a fluff-piece, BIAD... you promised it would be light...! and you're correct.
So staying within the confines of showing the dumbing-whilst-informing qualities of the Blue Pill, we'll pop one in
our mouths and move on. Let's get back to the 'touchy-feely' candy.

'...He also hinted at a lingering resentment about what he was asked to do at his mother Princess Diana's
funeral in 1997, when he was just 12. "My mother had just died, and I had to walk a long way behind her coffin,
surrounded by thousands of people watching me while millions more did on television," he said.
"I don't think any child should be asked to do that, under any circumstances. I don't think it would happen today."

Harry revealed in April that he had sought help after he "shut down" his emotions following Princess Diana's death
in a road accident in 1997. Regarding Diana's legacy, he said: "I intuitively know what my mother would like me to
do and want to progress with work she couldn't complete."...'

I'm not being heartless towards Prince Harry and the loss of his mother, she was held in such esteem by the public
that Harry's Father -Charles, always seemed to be in Diana's  shadow. But my focus is how this article is used as a
vehicle by both the writer and the Prince to carry a message.

It's probably only a coincidence that this article is published a couple of days after a dying man revealed he was
a retired MI5 agent that allegedly assassinated Prince Harry's mum. That piece is deemed bogus by the mainstream
media and the gatekeepers of the internet, so I'll guess that the word 'coincidence' is an apt one and certainly suits
anyone who consumes the Blue Pill!

'...When she was photographed shaking hands with a HIV-positive man in 1987, the notion that HIV/Aids might be
passed on through touch was challenged.

In December, Harry was photographed having an HIV test in Barbados. He said his mother "had the most wonderful
sense of humour and always wanted to make things fun for us, as well as protect us".
Diana also "took a huge part in showing me an ordinary life"...'

This last sentence could be seen in two ways. When the Royals talk outside of their inner-circle, they tend to use titles
of station and by name rather than 'my brother/sister/mother' unless the narrative demands otherwise.
If you're talking about a relation in the context of his position to the throne, then it's best not to offer personality  and
keep it formal. The structure of succession must be maintained at all times.

The last sentence could also just be a drop-in by the writer of the article with a bit of 'free licence'!

'..."People would be amazed by the ordinary life William and I live," Harry said. "I do my own shopping.
Even if I was King, I would do my own shopping."...'

No he couldn't and certainly not in the manner his subjects generally purchase items in a high-street or even online.
He knows he wouldn't be allowed to behave in the way it's implied, but he's attempting to 'humanise' the monarchy
organisation for the kids with purple hair and gender-study degrees. Harry's suggesting that after Brexit, the loveable
plum-voiced Windsors will be there just like the regular Nigel or Daphne in the street... just like you and me.

What Prince Harry is either omitting or isn't aware of (which I doubt!)... is that there's a system in place that protects
this family from harm. This system doesn't see Union Jack-waving old women as harmless and they don't assume
gawking shoppers as merely in awe if any member of the Royal family even believed they could just trot down to Oxford
Street in London to buy a bottle of Chateau Petrus.
Which they can't.

Think Micheal Jackson is Harrods... and then triple the security logistics.

'...But could things become too ordinary, removing the Royal Family's mystery? "It's a tricky balancing act," he said.
"We don't want to dilute the magic. The British public and the whole world need institutions like it."
Harry had lots of praise for the Queen, saying: "She is so remarkable."...'

See...? She's his freakin' Grandmother, for heaven's sake!! Yet when protecting the narrative, Queen Elizabeth is
spoken about in her position of station and not as a family member. And this is news, huh!

'..."The monarchy is a force for good," he said, "and we (Harry, William and Kate) want to carry on the positive
atmosphere that the Queen has achieved for over 60 years, but we won't be trying to fill her boots...'

Sneaky-bit inserted there possibly -and possibly by the Sky Reporter. You notice the '...but we won't be trying to fill her boots'
comment isn't set in quotation marks in the article? This is possibly to vaguely tie the material back to it's original headline.
But unless it's an original error in Newsweek or from the cut-and-pasting by this Sky guy, Prince Harry didn't say it.

Anyway, Harry's getting the message through that having a King or Queen is 'a force for good' and that's what counts here!
Maybe the lad -Prince Henry of Wales officially and Captain in the Army Air Corps can tell us more about the real reason
for this article.

'..."We are involved in modernising the British monarchy. We are not doing this for ourselves but for the greater
good of the people." Concerning which roles he, William and Kate take on, Harry said the Queen "has been
fantastic in letting us choose". He added: "She tells us to take our time and really think things through."...'

And there you have it. When those of the British Isles that are still taking the recommended measure of the Blue
Pill and find themselves on the otherside of Brexit, they can feel safe that a structure that was in place long before
anyone ever dreamed of halting the many wars between the countries that really control the European Union,
will be there to steer Great Britain forward and keep the status-quo for those who've never stacked shelves in a
Supermarket or slept rough beside a canal.

And don't worry, the cat pictures on the internet and Bollinger-induced marches in London for the wealthy
guilt-ridden can continue.
God bless the Queen.

[Daitengu]

If they not want the job .... will volunteer to be king an restore the empire to its former glory .....  though will rule from here in japan ....  first off send some the cute redhead scottish lasses .....  whisky .... lots whisky ....  list of further royal commands will follow shortly ..... gotta go practice trampling peasants and deflowering.... erm.... mean rescuing maidens ......

[BIAD]

I wrote in an earlier post:
'... The reality of solar-power in the Britain is ridiculous and if there was one area where exporting
a product would be profitable, is rainwater!! A few years ago, we were actually trucking water from
reservoirs near me in the north to the lower areas in the south...'

And here we freakin' go again. Every summer that it doesn't rain for a couple of weeks in the
south of England, that dry sky falls in and they start the 'hosepipe-ban' routine.

Rivers and streams in parts of UK 'under threat of drying up', says WWF.

'The warning comes as parts of the UK face the possibility of drought that the group says
could push wildlife to the brink.

Hundreds of rivers and streams are at risk of drying out due to poor water management.
A report by the World Wide Fund for Nature warns over half of chalk streams and a quarter
of rivers are under threat if action isn't taken.
At the River Chess in Buckinghamshire there's no water flowing.



The riverbed is dry, with cracked mud and weeds where the stream once ran.

Chairman of the River Chess Association Paul Jennings said: "This would be knee-depth
crystal clear water that's come out of the chalk aquifer, with lovely fronds of weed.
You have ducks and swans and all sorts of livestock in here plus fish.
But we don't have that now."

It's been dried up since October, and it's not uncommon here.
"Over the last six years we've had four drying events, where there's been absolutely no water
at all in this section," Mr Jennings said.
The problem is, when rivers dry up, the wildlife leaves.



The River Chess is home to kingfishers, rare water voles and several species of fish.
The WWF warns 550 bodies of water in England and Wales are at risk of drying out.
Its report says over-abstraction and poor management are to blame.

Put simply, consumers and agriculture are taking out too much water from our rivers...'
SOURCE: