|
Prince Charles Helps Fuel the Fires of Ignorance and War
February 2020
Another year, another World Holocaust Forum at Yad Vashem in Jerusalem, the fifth in fact since 2005 when the event was inaugurated as an ill-fated attempt to forge a sacred cow from a dying hoax. The usual gang of hypocrites, stooges, opportunists and traitors to their own people were there once again this January to bow long and low before the Golden Calf of Rothschild, Netanyahu and ilk. Those attending included Macron, Mattarella, Pence, Pelosi and Putin, and a host of other dignitaries and charlatans, all vying to best milk the thing to their own advantage. But perhaps most tellingly in the circumstances was one particularly conspicuous addition to the 2020 guest list, in his now familiar role as a trite parody of himself, Charles, the Prince of Wales.
 |
| Above: Bushfire apocalypse. Raging wildfires turn the sky over Mallacoota, East Gippsland blood red on New Years Eve. Meanwhile, ostensibly opposing elements of the mainstream media both here and abroad have been far too busy playing blame games for the political advantage of their masters to discover and report to the public about the true nature of the problem. |
The prince, of course, ranks prominently among those so-called "environmentalists" more than happy to express concerns about climate change on the world stage while ignoring altogether the elephant in the room environmental disaster that is climate engineering.
Perhaps he should get out more.
Earlier in January he released a recorded video message offering empty and frankly repugnant condolences to bushfire-stricken Australians, while failing to do the one thing that might truly help them long term: raise awareness about the thoroughly insane and idiotic geoengineering operations that have been (for at least the last six years) coating affected areas of the Australian Bush and elsewhere with layer upon layer of incendiary dust, while thoroughly disrupting the natural hydrological cycle and destroying the protective ozone layer. (Needless to say a highly volatile combination.) This clandestine policy has, critically, changed substantially the way seasonal bushfires in Australia burn, an effect that has not escaped the attention of observant, experienced, exhausted and somewhat puzzled Australian fire-fighters.
[CG reported back in 2014 on intensive and extensive geoengineering operations in Gippsland beginning in December of the previous year, and warned of unprecedented, consequent bushfires here.]
Ironically, in the hope of containing the bushfires, the geoengineers are now using precisely the same methodology and technology to control weather conditions that largely caused the catastrophe in the first place. Like a one-trick pony chasing its own tail they also aim, no doubt, to keep a lid for the present on the sheer magnitude of their own stupidity and culpability in the matter, and that of those who authorise them. It does not take a towering intellect, however, to perceive that such a strategy can only at best kick the can further down the road where it must surely reappear in still more daunting form in the near future. Fact is, these infernal idiots are simply playing for the little time they have left ....
 |
| Above: Prince Charles at Yad Vashem in Jerusalem this January. A suitably solemn grovel. |
But back to Yad Vashem for the moment. Here are two excerpts from Prince Charles' monologue in Jerusalem this January:
"To come to this sacred place, Yad Vashem, a memorial and a name, is to be faced with that for which no name, no words, and no language can ever possibly do justice."
"The Holocaust must never be allowed to become simply a fact of history. We must never cease to be appalled, nor moved by the testimony of those who lived through it. Their experience must always educate and guide us and warn us."
And so on and on and on.
 |
One can't help wondering what exactly it is that has reduced the apparent heir to the British throne to a "little grovelling b - - tard" for the nation calling itself Israel, if the reader will excuse a term borrowed from court jester Milligan. Or to what exactly does international Jewry owe such ardent and undying support? Frankly one is less inclined to believe it to be courage of conviction and real insight than ambition, compromise and cerebral mediocrity. Or worse.
 |
The quasi-religious overtones of the rhetoric, and the obsequious reverence, will not be lost on astute observers of the speech able to stomach the full length of it. Neither will the call to be educated and guided by the experience of survivors. In fact, in this latter regard we concur entirely, with the proviso only that one does so critically and intelligently and not in a state of blind, reverential awe. The testimonies of the survivors included in the documentary here (or here or here) for instance are edifying indeed, though perhaps not quite in the way Prince Charles intended.
Alternatively, in the same spirit of education and guidance, the prince might wish to consider the words of Jewish professor and political activist, Norman Finkelstein, from his 2000 book "The Holocaust Industry" (Finkelstein's father and mother were inmates of Auschwitz and Majdanek concentration camps respectively):
and,
"Once ideologically recast, The Holocaust .... proved to be the perfect weapon for deflecting criticism of Israel."
and also,
"The Holocaust has proven to be an indispensable ideological weapon. Through its deployment, one of the world's most formidable military powers, with a horrendous human rights record, has cast itself as a 'victim' state, and the most successful ethnic group in the United States has likewise acquired victim status. Considerable dividends accrue from this specious victimhood — in particular, immunity to criticism, however justified. Those enjoying this immunity, I might add, have not escaped the moral corruptions that typically attend it."
In fact, Finkelstein, as might be expected, does not go nearly far enough in his book to expose the full extent of the Holocaust hoax, but it is in any case unlikely that Prince Charles takes much interest in testimonies at odds with the ones he finds politically convenient or necessary, or inconsistent with the trite and servile rhetoric he makes so distinctly his own.
 |
Nonetheless, Finkelstein's warning about the moral corruption resulting from the use of the Holocaust narrative as an ideological shield is as timely today as it ever was. In fact, the corruption has spread into everything from science to entertainment to information services to politics, but it is perhaps in the latter regard that it is most transparently discernible.
Time and again we see the world brought to the brink of immensely destructive conflict by one pointless exercise of aggression for "Israel" after another - the usual puppet states and statesmen obliging of course. And time and again we see gross abuses of human rights in the region go unheeded and unpunished. All of which makes the attendance of Prince Charles and others at Yad Vashem not only half-witted, obsequious, opportunistic and cowardly, but downright irresponsible as well. Certainly, it is not mere happenstance that Mr. Netanyahu used the occasion as a platform to call yet again for action against Iran, or to frighten his own people into submission with alarmism about a second holocaust. Neither is it mere chance that Israel's idea of a "peace plan" should be presented to the Palestinians and the world less than a week later. But surely all this is obvious?
Such tactics are perhaps only to be expected from the likes of Binyamin Netanyahu, but one can't help wondering what exactly it is that has reduced the apparent heir to the British throne to a "little grovelling b - - tard" for the nation calling itself Israel, if the reader will excuse a term borrowed from court jester Milligan. (Many a true word ... !) Or to what exactly does international Jewry owe such ardent and undying support? Frankly one is less inclined to believe it to be courage of conviction and real insight than ambition, compromise and cerebral mediocrity. Or worse.
 |
 |
| The Prince and the Honey Trap. Top: Prince Andrew is photographed with Jeffrey Epstein in New York's Central Park in 2010. Bottom: The Old Jerusalem style temple on Epstein's infamous island in the Caribbean (left). Curiously, its distinctive golden dome has now been removed (right). |
Certainly, Charles' lately beleaguered brother Andrew, one time bosom buddy of the conveniently suicidal and security-camera-defying pedophile, Jeffrey Epstein, has not exactly distinguished himself in that regard in recent times, a fact that the Jewish controlled media have used to full advantage. (And yes, that does include controlled opposition elements folks!) Just watch the story of Andrew's involvement in the Epstein honey-trap affair resurface any time anyone thinks of reporting on anything remotely connected to its broader significance: an utterly compromised and broken political system and the Jewish role and modus operandi in bringing it about.
After all, Prince Andrew is known to have stayed at Epstein's homes in Palm beach, Florida, New York and the Caribbean, and Epstein is known to have been in the habit of using hidden pinhole cameras on his property in places where one might have reasonably expected some privacy, toilets and bedrooms included apparently. You work it out. Safe to say, whatever it is they have on Andrew et al, the threat both to him and his family is implicit and thus far effective: "we fall, you fall partner, just keep Maxwell* and Mossad out of it ...."
Which perhaps explains why Epstein got away with what he was doing more or less brazenly for so long, or why US attorney, Alexander Acosta, reportedly claimed that he had been told (presumably by "superiors") to "back off" his prosecution of Epstein in 2007/2008 based on a 53 page indictment, and offer a disgracefully lenient and legally questionable plea deal instead, because Epstein "belonged to intelligence" and the affair was above Acosta's "pay grade". We note further that a smirking Acosta used plainly evasive and misleading language at a press conference last year (listen carefully here) to dodge a straightforward opportunity to categorically deny or dismiss the report.
|
*With friends like these .... 
Another long term friend of Prince Andrew, Ghislane Maxwell (pictured left), the alleged "Epstein madam", continues to evade criminal prosecution despite statements by alleged victims in which she is accused of sexual abuse of minors and procurement for that purpose. Her late father, Robert (a Czechoslovakian Jew whose real name was Ján Ludvík Hyman Binyamin Hoch), presided over a vast publishing empire in the UK until his death in 1991, the victim of an apparent boating accident. His funeral was attended by "no less than six serving and former Israeli heads of intelligence services" and he was eulogized by Israeli Prime Minister, Yitshak Shamir himself, who stated for the record: “[Maxwell] has done more for Israel than can today be said." Later it was discovered that the newspaper tycoon with the reassuringly Scottish name had stolen hundreds of millions of pounds from his companies' pension funds. Needless to say the British taxpayer partly footed the bill, but even then the unfortunately affected pensioners had to settle for a mere half of what was due them. |
|
Safe to say, whatever it is they have on Prince Andrew et al, the threat is implicit and thus far effective: "we fall, you fall partner, just keep Maxwell and Mossad out of it ...."
Also noteworthy are reports that high profile scientists, pseudo-scientists and science-mythologists, have been among the visitors to Epstein's infamous "Pedophile Island" in recent years, a revelation that will not come as too much of a surprise to regular readers of this website. Epstein's guests included Cambridge professor, Stephen Hawking, and Jewish theorist, Lawrence Krauss, the latter choosing to retire recently from his post at Arizona State University in the face of sexual misconduct allegations and an ongoing university investigation. Another Judeo-atheist, the late Marvin Minsky, known apparently for his work in AI, has been accused of sex with a minor procured for him by Maxwell. And Jewish lawyer, Alan Dershowitz, a one time outspoken critic of Holocaust revisionism, will have his hands full in the near term trying to dodge jail time and lawsuits related to his involvement in the Epstein affair, no doubt with the same kind of misrepresentations, mischaracterisations, slanders, falsehoods and phoney logic with which he used to disparage revisionist scholars. Funny how truth always outs in the end.
Equally unsurprising to those who take an interest in the psychology of what is unfolding are reports that the New York-Miami-Tel Aviv modelling agency of Epstein's best friend, Jean Luc Brunel, by which the latter allegedly supplied the former with a steady stream of under aged girls, was called MC2. But that's another story.
Of course, all this raises important questions about whether men such as Princes Charles and Andrew (not too bright either of them, let's face it), and goodness knows how many other world/thought leaders, can be trusted any longer to objectively serve the interests of the people or the disciplines they ought or purport to, if they ever really could be trusted at all. Indeed, as the much maligned but thus far indomitable Brexiteers of the British isles prepare (despite past leadership and intrigue) to embrace more independently and bravely the still young century and millennium, setting thus an important example for others, it is becoming increasingly difficult not to notice that dusty and decayed institutions such as Charles, the Prince of Wales and the House of so-called "Lords" (not to mention that other more recently installed affront to democracy and decency, the UK "Supreme" court) seem more glaringly anachronistic and obstructive than ever.
Update February 5th : Dead men tell no tales
 |
As news continues to emerge about yet another multiple stabbing attack on the streets of London, this time in Streatham on Sunday, readers are cautioned to keep in mind the following:
1. According to early reports the police response to the incident was uncannily swift.
2. The alleged attacker has yet again been shot dead, presumably by a police officer. In fact, the latter was described by an eye-witness as being one among others wearing "civilian clothing". Were MI5 also involved?
3. The alleged attacker is yet again a man recently released from prison after serving only part of a term for "terrorist related offences". He was reportedly under close police surveillance. Were other branches of the Home Office also involved in surveillance, such as MI5?
4. The alleged attacker will almost certainly turn out to be, in official reports, a lone actor without co-conspirators. Indeed the incident was described by a police spokeswoman as an "isolated" one very soon afterwards.
5. The alleged attacker, Sudesh Amman, 20, is again apparently a Muslim, but dead men tell no tales and this incident, like similar ones before it, may not be all that it seems, or is reported to be.
6. While in prison (or otherwise incarcerated) impressionable, young men, possibly bearing a grudge and possibly unbalanced or dim-witted or both, are particularly well-placed for psychological manipulation and programming. They are quite literally a captive audience. And the perpetrators of such manipulations, for their part, need not be what they appear to be, especially to the young men themselves. Details of the circumstances and conditions of Amman's prison term, however, have not been disclosed and there have been no reports of an investigation regarding them.
Such incidents, and attending media stories, invariably focus the attention of the public on secondary effects and symptoms of the underlying problem, and away from more pertinent causal factors. That is to say, away from long term, lasting solutions towards short term, shallow approaches of varying degrees of inadequacy.
7. Such incidents provoke much fear and confusion among the public and serve inevitably as a distraction from other news stories. They also provide, implicitly, favourable publicity for police and government while giving rise to predictable calls for increase of powers and funding of same. The effect of such increases if implemented, however, may not be quite what some of their advocates have in mind. This is because a threat is invariably perceived with respect to one's own perceived interests, and the perceived threat to two different groups (for example the people and the Home Office*) is only likely to be the same if their perceived interests are really the same. Moreover, once police or government department powers are increased they can be implemented as the controllers of those groups see fit, regardless of the claimed justifications that initially inspired the people's consent or approval of them.**
8. Such incidents, and attending media stories, invariably focus the attention of the public on secondary effects and symptoms of the underlying problem, and away from more pertinent causal factors. That is to say, away from long term, lasting solutions towards short term, shallow approaches of varying degrees of inadequacy.
9. The UK prime minister, Boris Johnson, reportedly called an emergency meeting with Priti Patel in response to the incident. Readers may recall that Patel, the former vice chair of the "Conservative Friends of Israel" group, and lobbyist for the tobacco and alcohol industries, was forced to resign a couple of years ago from her post as International Development Secretary after being caught out in secret, unauthorised meetings with Israeli government officials in London, New York and Israel; meetings about which both the Foreign Office and then Prime Minister, Theresa May, denied any knowledge (for what that is worth, i.e. nothing). Apparently Johnson and the Conservative party are counting on a public with a very short memory - Patel is now the UK Home Secretary no less - a fact which hardly inspires great confidence in the priorities of the British government when it comes to so-called national security.
*Recall that this is the same Home Office that under Home Secretaries Sajid Javid, Amber Rudd and Theresa May, and in collusion with the UN, was exposed by the Barnabas Fund falsely and overwhelmingly discriminating against horrifically persecuted Syrian Christians seeking asylum in the UK (in favour of Sunni Muslims) and then trying to illegally withold information regarding the fact. See here (screenshot here in case of article removal - you may need to zoom in to read) and here.
Further reading from the Barnabas Fund here and here (screenshots here and here respectively).
Update February 25th : Did somebody cry wolf?
At the risk of stating the painfully obvious, reports coming in (screenshot here*) of bomb threats against Jewish community centres in New York State are more than a little reminiscent of the Kadar false flag affair of only a few years ago, in which literally thousands of similar threats against Jewish targets in the US and elsewhere, including Australia, were traced back to a man working out of Israel.
Rather embarrassingly for the Israeli authorities ostensibly investigating the matter at the time (with international pressure at their backs to help them along a bit) the man turned out to be Jewish, a revelation that really ought to have put an end altogether to the "antisemitism" alarmism and spin generously afforded the story by the mainstream media, but somehow illogically didn't. Of course, the latter part of the story did not receive quite the same media coverage that the "antisemitism" hype did.
CG reported on the trial of the perpetrator, Israeli resident Michael Kadar of Ashkelon, in our November 2018 article, "Meet America's Most Likely Victim of Mid-Term Election Fraud". Here is an excerpt:
".... perhaps the most significant information to come to light in the matter has surfaced only recently in a follow up sympathy-piece written for the Times in September in which Kadar's father admitted his son had not been working alone. Describing the trial as "one big conspiracy" he pointed out that his son had taken "requests" to do what he did, for which the latter was paid handsomely in anonymous bitcoin. In fact, investigators have uncovered takings of hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of the cryptocurrency. "Nobody is asking who paid [Kadar]", he said, adding, "Everyone is satisfied with pinning the entire thing on [Kadar] and ignoring the fact that there are people behind every one of those requests."
It is not the first time that Kadar's father has alluded to conspiracy. In June he claimed in a court statement that, "there is a conspiracy here .... when the FBI checks who his customers were they will be surprised."
Nonetheless, New York State Governor, Andrew Cuomo, did not let any of the above get in the way of chiming in on cue in the mainstream media regarding the more recent spate of bomb threats, delivering an altogether predictable dose of misleading rhetoric about "antisemitism" and a warning about the "contagion of hate" or "virus of hate" we all need to be looking out for (along with the corona virus apparently) lest we too be "infected", presumably.
Note well Cuomo's choice of words. In the somewhat clumsy attempt of a political hack to borrow inappropriately from present alarm and anxiety about a virus outbreak for his own dubious purposes, the deeper and more significant error, the conflation of the subjective and the objective, is a recurring theme that will not go unnoticed by astute followers of this website.
*check for subsequent modifications