❝Big pharma, government, church leaders face arrest as Court convicts them of Genocide, prohibits injections❞

[sushi_chef]

"Global Breaking News, January 15, 2022 (GMT)

This groundbreaking announcement announces the conviction of those involved in global genocide. It gives every man and woman on the planet the authority to seize and destroy any and all Covid-19 paraphenalia. At the same time, we can arrest anyone who is named in the verdict for crimes against Humanity.

Brussels and Vancouver:

The International Court that forced Pope Benedict from office in 2013 has struck a blow against the COVID corporatocracy by convicting top officials of Pfizer, GlaxoSmithKline, China, and the Vatican of Crimes against Humanity.

The Court’s verdict sentences seventy-five individuals to life imprisonment, seizes their assets and disestablishes their corporations, and lawfully prohibits the further manufacture, sale, or use of their COVID vaccines as “products of medical genocide and mass murder”.

After a four-month trial convened under International Law, the judges of the International Common Law Court of Justice (ICLCJ) issued their historic verdict and sentence today, along with Arrest and Expropriation Warrants against the defendants.

The convicted individuals include Albert Bourla and Emma Walmsley, the CEO’s of Pfizer and GlaxoSmithKline Pharmaceuticals, Xi Jinping, President of China, ‘Pope’ Francis (Jorge Bergoglio), ‘Queen’ Elizabeth (Windsor), and Justin Trudeau, Prime Minister of Canada.

According to the Public Affairs Office of the Court, ...

" https://tapnewswire.com/2022/01/big-pha ... njections/

[Juliet]

Is this some sort of common law court or something?

[Niemand]

Is this some sort of common law court or something?

It's an imaginary court. None of this happened. Sadly.

[Juliet]

Is this some sort of common law court or something?

It's an imaginary court. None of this happened. Sadly.

The concept of a common law court is still fascinating for me. The second amendment doesn't just give us the right to bear arms. It gives us the right to organize a militia. The courts are elected to serve us and they are paid for by us to protect us. So if we see they are not protecting us and fear satanic overlords more than the people the idea of a common law court makes me feel much safer than the white hat narrative going around that military tribunals will come save us. Of course I think you live in England.... But common law is basically above any other law of any land....whether a country's government respects it or not, it is true that all man are created equal. God made man, man made government. Therefore any government is subject to the authority of the consent of that man who supports it. And if a man doesn't support it... He has authority under God to reject it.

[Niemand]

Is this some sort of common law court or something?

It's an imaginary court. None of this happened. Sadly.

The concept of a common law court is still fascinating for me. The second amendment doesn't just give us the right to bear arms. It gives us the right to organize a militia. The courts are elected to serve us and they are paid for by us to protect us. So if we see they are not protecting us and fear satanic overlords more than the people the idea of a common law court makes me feel much safer than the white hat narrative going around that military tribunals will come save us. Of course I think you live in England.... But common law is basically above any other law of any land....whether a country's government respects it or not, it is true that all man are created equal. God made man, man made government. Therefore any government is subject to the authority of the consent of that man who supports it. And if a man doesn't support it... He has authority under God to reject it.

I live in Scotland. Our legal system is based in Roman law, like Lousiana's, but with some common law elements. Long story. So in our system, common law is there but arguably not as much as England, where it is the main element.

Also the Magna Carta technically has no legal force in Scotland (for better or worse) due to the history of the two countries. Just saying that because I've seen one or two LDS books that don't reflect that.

The legal system was one of the few concessions Scotland got when it lost its independence in 1707, along with a separate education system, its own church (Presbyterian rather than Anglican) and one or two other things.

Scotland also has the unique position of being the only place in the world you can be found "guilty not proven". It's controversial but not without its uses.

[Robin Hood]

Is this some sort of common law court or something?

It's an imaginary court. None of this happened. Sadly.

The concept of a common law court is still fascinating for me. The second amendment doesn't just give us the right to bear arms. It gives us the right to organize a militia. The courts are elected to serve us and they are paid for by us to protect us. So if we see they are not protecting us and fear satanic overlords more than the people the idea of a common law court makes me feel much safer than the white hat narrative going around that military tribunals will come save us. Of course I think you live in England.... But common law is basically above any other law of any land....whether a country's government respects it or not, it is true that all man are created equal. God made man, man made government. Therefore any government is subject to the authority of the consent of that man who supports it. And if a man doesn't support it... He has authority under God to reject it.

I live in Scotland. Our legal system is based in Roman law, like Lousiana's, but with some common law elements. Long story. So in our system, common law is there but arguably not as much as England, where it is the main element.

Also the Magna Carta technically has no legal force in Scotland (for better or worse) due to the history of the two countries. Just saying that because I've seen one or two LDS books that don't reflect that.

The legal system was one of the few concessions Scotland got when it lost its independence in 1707, along with a separate education system, its own church (Presbyterian rather than Anglican) and one or two other things.

Scotland also has the unique position of being the only place in the world you can be found "guilty not proven". It's controversial but not without its uses.

Scotland gave up it's independence. It was, in effect, a bail out by England because the Scottish economy was bankrupt.
This was an arrangement between the nobles and the crown/parliament. The commoners on either side of the border were never consulted.

I like the "not proven" verdict option in the Scottish court system. It's a good way of saying "we all know you did it but we can't prove it beyond a reasonable doubt, and so we're not going to acquit you".

Common Law courts exist in England. Common Law is the highest law of the land and even the monarch must submit to it, thanks to Cromwell and his Puritans.

[Juliet]

Is this some sort of common law court or something?

It's an imaginary court. None of this happened. Sadly.

The concept of a common law court is still fascinating for me. The second amendment doesn't just give us the right to bear arms. It gives us the right to organize a militia. The courts are elected to serve us and they are paid for by us to protect us. So if we see they are not protecting us and fear satanic overlords more than the people the idea of a common law court makes me feel much safer than the white hat narrative going around that military tribunals will come save us. Of course I think you live in England.... But common law is basically above any other law of any land....whether a country's government respects it or not, it is true that all man are created equal. God made man, man made government. Therefore any government is subject to the authority of the consent of that man who supports it. And if a man doesn't support it... He has authority under God to reject it.

I live in Scotland. Our legal system is based in Roman law, like Lousiana's, but with some common law elements. Long story. So in our system, common law is there but arguably not as much as England, where it is the main element.

Also the Magna Carta technically has no legal force in Scotland (for better or worse) due to the history of the two countries. Just saying that because I've seen one or two LDS books that don't reflect that.

The legal system was one of the few concessions Scotland got when it lost its independence in 1707, along with a separate education system, its own church (Presbyterian rather than Anglican) and one or two other things.

Scotland also has the unique position of being the only place in the world you can be found "guilty not proven". It's controversial but not without its uses.

Very enlightening! Thank you! I am sorry I got your country wrong. Regardless if common law is respected or not, it is not easy to overthrow a government. Nor is it wise to do so, unless the government becomes unbearable. Even then, many people would just suffer it rather than risk overthrowing it and all the risk that entails.

Is Scotland heavy on the lock downs and other restrictions?

[Juliet]

It's an imaginary court. None of this happened. Sadly.

The concept of a common law court is still fascinating for me. The second amendment doesn't just give us the right to bear arms. It gives us the right to organize a militia. The courts are elected to serve us and they are paid for by us to protect us. So if we see they are not protecting us and fear satanic overlords more than the people the idea of a common law court makes me feel much safer than the white hat narrative going around that military tribunals will come save us. Of course I think you live in England.... But common law is basically above any other law of any land....whether a country's government respects it or not, it is true that all man are created equal. God made man, man made government. Therefore any government is subject to the authority of the consent of that man who supports it. And if a man doesn't support it... He has authority under God to reject it.

I live in Scotland. Our legal system is based in Roman law, like Lousiana's, but with some common law elements. Long story. So in our system, common law is there but arguably not as much as England, where it is the main element.

Also the Magna Carta technically has no legal force in Scotland (for better or worse) due to the history of the two countries. Just saying that because I've seen one or two LDS books that don't reflect that.

The legal system was one of the few concessions Scotland got when it lost its independence in 1707, along with a separate education system, its own church (Presbyterian rather than Anglican) and one or two other things.

Scotland also has the unique position of being the only place in the world you can be found "guilty not proven". It's controversial but not without its uses.

Scotland gave up it's independence. It was, in effect, a bail out by England because the Scottish economy was bankrupt.
This was an arrangement between the nobles and the crown/parliament. The commoners on either side of the border were never consulted.

I like the "not proven" verdict option in the Scottish court system. It's a good way of saying "we all know you did it but we can't prove it beyond a reasonable doubt, and so we're not going to acquit you".

Common Law courts exist in England. Common Law is the highest law of the land and even the monarch must submit to it, thanks to Cromwell and his Puritans.

Is there any hope people in England would take advantage of common law and make up a common law court to take freedom back from the mandates?

Seems like a last resort of things, fixing the election fraud is the first choice of reform in my opinion as far as the U.S. is concerned.

[oneClimbs]

Are we for international courts set up by unknown people throwing out convictions without due process?

[Robin Hood]

The concept of a common law court is still fascinating for me. The second amendment doesn't just give us the right to bear arms. It gives us the right to organize a militia. The courts are elected to serve us and they are paid for by us to protect us. So if we see they are not protecting us and fear satanic overlords more than the people the idea of a common law court makes me feel much safer than the white hat narrative going around that military tribunals will come save us. Of course I think you live in England.... But common law is basically above any other law of any land....whether a country's government respects it or not, it is true that all man are created equal. God made man, man made government. Therefore any government is subject to the authority of the consent of that man who supports it. And if a man doesn't support it... He has authority under God to reject it.

I live in Scotland. Our legal system is based in Roman law, like Lousiana's, but with some common law elements. Long story. So in our system, common law is there but arguably not as much as England, where it is the main element.

Also the Magna Carta technically has no legal force in Scotland (for better or worse) due to the history of the two countries. Just saying that because I've seen one or two LDS books that don't reflect that.

The legal system was one of the few concessions Scotland got when it lost its independence in 1707, along with a separate education system, its own church (Presbyterian rather than Anglican) and one or two other things.

Scotland also has the unique position of being the only place in the world you can be found "guilty not proven". It's controversial but not without its uses.

Scotland gave up it's independence. It was, in effect, a bail out by England because the Scottish economy was bankrupt.
This was an arrangement between the nobles and the crown/parliament. The commoners on either side of the border were never consulted.

I like the "not proven" verdict option in the Scottish court system. It's a good way of saying "we all know you did it but we can't prove it beyond a reasonable doubt, and so we're not going to acquit you".

Common Law courts exist in England. Common Law is the highest law of the land and even the monarch must submit to it, thanks to Cromwell and his Puritans.

Is there any hope people in England would take advantage of common law and make up a common law court to take freedom back from the mandates?

Seems like a last resort of things, fixing the election fraud is the first choice of reform in my opinion as far as the U.S. is concerned.

Apparently that is being planned.

[Robin Hood]

It's an imaginary court. None of this happened. Sadly.

The concept of a common law court is still fascinating for me. The second amendment doesn't just give us the right to bear arms. It gives us the right to organize a militia. The courts are elected to serve us and they are paid for by us to protect us. So if we see they are not protecting us and fear satanic overlords more than the people the idea of a common law court makes me feel much safer than the white hat narrative going around that military tribunals will come save us. Of course I think you live in England.... But common law is basically above any other law of any land....whether a country's government respects it or not, it is true that all man are created equal. God made man, man made government. Therefore any government is subject to the authority of the consent of that man who supports it. And if a man doesn't support it... He has authority under God to reject it.

I live in Scotland. Our legal system is based in Roman law, like Lousiana's, but with some common law elements. Long story. So in our system, common law is there but arguably not as much as England, where it is the main element.

Also the Magna Carta technically has no legal force in Scotland (for better or worse) due to the history of the two countries. Just saying that because I've seen one or two LDS books that don't reflect that.

The legal system was one of the few concessions Scotland got when it lost its independence in 1707, along with a separate education system, its own church (Presbyterian rather than Anglican) and one or two other things.

Scotland also has the unique position of being the only place in the world you can be found "guilty not proven". It's controversial but not without its uses.

Very enlightening! Thank you! I am sorry I got your country wrong. Regardless if common law is respected or not, it is not easy to overthrow a government. Nor is it wise to do so, unless the government becomes unbearable. Even then, many people would just suffer it rather than risk overthrowing it and all the risk that entails.

Is Scotland heavy on the lock downs and other restrictions?

Scotland has been a lot more heavy handed than England. This is mostly a function of political posturing.
Niemand can tell you all about it.

[Niemand]

Is Scotland heavy on the lock downs and other restrictions?

Currently the four parts of the UK have slightly different set ups. Robin Hood can fill you in better about England. Here's how I understood it.

* England has had pretty much the lightest touch throughou, but there have been local lockdowns based on cities and council areas. So I think Manchester got their own lockdown at one point. England has some vocal opposition, and a lot of the major protests have happened there - outside Northern Ireland, that is where the main opposition is. Boris Johnson has direct control of England and is not to be trusted. He is a globalist and eugenicist posing as Brexit supporter.

* Scotland has mostly the strictest of the four, and you weren't supposed to go out of your local area at one point. In fact, at one point it was supposedly five miles, which is totally impractical in country areas (I used to live in a place where the nearest town of a few thousand was ten miles away). There have been some protests in Scotland and I see stickers, but it doesn't seem to reach most of the population here. Someone said in 2021 that Scotland was England plus two or three weeks. About right. We went down to Berwick upon Tweed a few times from my bit, which is a border town, but just inside England... to take advantage of lighter restrictions.

* Wales is currently the strictest and has stolen a lead over Scotland recently. You need a vaccine passport to go to the cinema for example (in Scotland it's nightclubs and major sports grounds). Wales' main problem is that a lot of people live in or near the border with England, and there are towns which straddle the border like Chester and Wrexham. If Wales has tighter rules than England, then people go to England for things and vice versa. There is a football ground in Chester which liea across the Border, and there has been a dispute about that.

* Northern Ireland is an odd one because they are technically stricter than Scotland, but it also, erm, has a lot of very independent minded people with guns- think IRA, UDA etc, so what the government says won't stick with those folk. The Loyalist types are very vocally against. Sammy Wilson, ex-mayor of Belfast, is one of the major opponents. (The Republic of Ireland has stricter rules than Northern Ireland but they are apparently not much enforced outside Dublin.)

Scotland has been a lot more heavy handed than England. This is mostly a function of political posturing.
Niemand can tell you all about it.

Yes, agreed. And now Wales in front. How effective were the regional lockdowns?

I bought into it early on, but got sick of it after a month or two, and noted "discrepancies". I wish I hadn't but I know better now. I found Nicola's briefings easier to follow than Boris', because he does the buffoon act all the time. I want to throw a brick at every telly I see either of them...

I think I told you that time we met up that I actually got a culture shock when I arrived in York and another when I went back. Much more oppressive atmosphere here.

[Juliet]

Is Scotland heavy on the lock downs and other restrictions?

Currently the four parts of the UK have slightly different set ups. Robin Hood can fill you in better about England. Here's how I understood it.

* England has had pretty much the lightest touch throughou, but there have been local lockdowns based on cities and council areas. So I think Manchester got their own lockdown at one point. England has some vocal opposition, and a lot of the major protests have happened there - outside Northern Ireland, that is where the main opposition is. Boris Johnson has direct control of England and is not to be trusted. He is a globalist and eugenicist posing as Brexit supporter.

* Scotland has mostly the strictest of the four, and you weren't supposed to go out of your local area at one point. In fact, at one point it was supposedly five miles, which is totally impractical in country areas (I used to live in a place where the nearest town of a few thousand was ten miles away). There have been some protests in Scotland and I see stickers, but it doesn't seem to reach most of the population here. Someone said in 2021 that Scotland was England plus two or three weeks. About right. We went down to Berwick upon Tweed a few times from my bit, which is a border town, but just inside England... to take advantage of lighter restrictions.

* Wales is currently the strictest and has stolen a lead over Scotland recently. You need a vaccine passport to go to the cinema for example (in Scotland it's nightclubs and major sports grounds). Wales' main problem is that a lot of people live in or near the border with England, and there are towns which straddle the border like Chester and Wrexham. If Wales has tighter rules than England, then people go to England for things and vice versa. There is a football ground in Chester which liea across the Border, and there has been a dispute about that.

* Northern Ireland is an odd one because they are technically stricter than Scotland, but it also, erm, has a lot of very independent minded people with guns- think IRA, UDA etc, so what the government says won't stick with those folk. The Loyalist types are very vocally against. Sammy Wilson, ex-mayor of Belfast, is one of the major opponents. (The Republic of Ireland has stricter rules than Northern Ireland but they are apparently not much enforced outside Dublin.)

Scotland has been a lot more heavy handed than England. This is mostly a function of political posturing.
Niemand can tell you all about it.

Yes, agreed. And now Wales in front. How effective were the regional lockdowns?

I bought into it early on, but got sick of it after a month or two, and noted "discrepancies". I wish I hadn't but I know better now. I found Nicola's briefings easier to follow than Boris', because he does the buffoon act all the time. I want to throw a brick at every telly I see either of them...

I think I told you that time we met up that I actually got a culture shock when I arrived in York and another when I went back. Much more oppressive atmosphere here.

You think Boris Johnson and Donald Trump are cousins?

Thank you for the very informative run down. It's nice to be aware of what is going on up there in the U.K.

[Niemand]

You think Boris Johnson and Donald Trump are cousins?

Thank you for the very informative run down. It's nice to be aware of what is going on up there in the U.K.

They've got similar hair and are womanisers, and that's the main similarity. Oh, and they've both got an obvious case of Boarding School Syndome, where the person creates a kind of front which they use to deflect from criticism.

Boris has written articles on the world being overpopulated but has at least seven children by multiple women. I don't know what they see in him.

He poses as being pro-Brexit, but he attended the World Economic Forum while still mayor of London. He has also pushed for Turkey to join the European Union.

He has a very curious ancestry, mixture of Turkish journalist, English and South German aristocracy. He is connected up with the de Pfeifel family. A lot of these globalists have odd backgrounds. You start looking into Elon Musk or Kamala Harris and they have very odd things in their family tree.

[Juliet]

You think Boris Johnson and Donald Trump are cousins?

Thank you for the very informative run down. It's nice to be aware of what is going on up there in the U.K.

They've got similar hair and are womanisers, and that's the main similarity. Oh, and they've both got an obvious case of Boarding School Syndome, where the person creates a kind of front which they use to deflect from criticism.

Boris has written articles on the world being overpopulated but has at least seven children by multiple women. I don't know what they see in him.

He poses as being pro-Brexit, but he attended the World Economic Forum while still mayor of London. He has also pushed for Turkey to join the European Union.

He has a very curious ancestry, mixture of Turkish journalist, English and South German aristocracy. He is connected up with the de Pfeifel family. A lot of these globalists have odd backgrounds. You start looking into Elon Musk or Kamala Harris and they have very odd things in their family tree.

I think they are all related. It seems you have two types of politicains... The ones who do the wrong thing and the ones who pretend to do the right thing but also do the wrong thing.

[Niemand]

I think they are all related. It seems you have two types of politicains... The ones who do the wrong thing and the ones who pretend to do the right thing but also do the wrong thing.

They have a factory line of them. Many of them are churned out through the World Economic Forum's Young Global Leaders programme, which has given us the likes of Jacinda Ardern in NZ, Justin Trudeau in Canada (although he inherited his job), Emmanuel Macron in France and Tony Blair in the UK. Also probably the very sinister Kurz in Austria who some think may be the "Big One" in the future.

There seem to be two main types -

* The suit who dresses "square" but very smartly, and is interchangeable with any number of others. Like Macron in France, Varadkar in Ireland. Maybe Biden. They make nice statements but introduce tighter laws.
* The clown/scapegoat - these are maverick types who have obvious character flaws who are useful in the sense that they can take all the blame for system failure onto themselves while everyone gets off scot free. Examples: Boris Johnson, Dubya. They generate a backlash, but love the money.

Also a third type, a kind of matronly or motherly woman (but often without children) who appeals to the middle classes - Merkel in Germany, Ardern in NZ.

[Juliet]

I think they are all related. It seems you have two types of politicains... The ones who do the wrong thing and the ones who pretend to do the right thing but also do the wrong thing.

They have a factory line of them. Many of them are churned out through the World Economic Forum's Young Global Leaders programme, which has given us the likes of Jacinda Ardern in NZ, Justin Trudeau in Canada (although he inherited his job), Emmanuel Macron in France and Tony Blair in the UK. Also probably the very sinister Kurz in Austria who some think may be the "Big One" in the future.

There seem to be two main types -

* The suit who dresses "square" but very smartly, and is interchangeable with any number of others. Like Macron in France, Varadkar in Ireland. Maybe Biden. They make nice statements but introduce tighter laws.
* The clown/scapegoat - these are maverick types who have obvious character flaws who are useful in the sense that they can take all the blame for system failure onto themselves while everyone gets off scot free. Examples: Boris Johnson, Dubya. They generate a backlash, but love the money.

Also a third type, a kind of matronly or motherly woman (but often without children) who appeals to the middle classes - Merkel in Germany, Ardern in NZ.

Margaret Thatcher too.

Dubya..nice.

Sometimes I think it would be nice to get into the political world. But in truth I guess the closest I will get to the political world is a political science 101 class where I learned the U.S. is a democratic republic and in the U.K. your two parties are the opposite of us. (I don't understand that all the way).

I figure if all my kids have 3 kids each for the next twenty generations I will be the mother of 20 billion. So I guess that works as good as taking over the planet.

[Niemand]

I think they are all related. It seems you have two types of politicains... The ones who do the wrong thing and the ones who pretend to do the right thing but also do the wrong thing.

They have a factory line of them. Many of them are churned out through the World Economic Forum's Young Global Leaders programme, which has given us the likes of Jacinda Ardern in NZ, Justin Trudeau in Canada (although he inherited his job), Emmanuel Macron in France and Tony Blair in the UK. Also probably the very sinister Kurz in Austria who some think may be the "Big One" in the future.

There seem to be two main types -

* The suit who dresses "square" but very smartly, and is interchangeable with any number of others. Like Macron in France, Varadkar in Ireland. Maybe Biden. They make nice statements but introduce tighter laws.
* The clown/scapegoat - these are maverick types who have obvious character flaws who are useful in the sense that they can take all the blame for system failure onto themselves while everyone gets off scot free. Examples: Boris Johnson, Dubya. They generate a backlash, but love the money.

Also a third type, a kind of matronly or motherly woman (but often without children) who appeals to the middle classes - Merkel in Germany, Ardern in NZ.

Margaret Thatcher too.

Dubya..nice.

Sometimes I think it would be nice to get into the political world. But in truth I guess the closest I will get to the political world is a political science 101 class where I learned the U.S. is a democratic republic and in the U.K. your two parties are the opposite of us. (I don't understand that all the way).

I figure if all my kids have 3 kids each for the next twenty generations I will be the mother of 20 billion. So I guess that works as good as taking over the planet.

It gets more complicated in Scotland we actually have a four party system or did. The main party here is the Scottish National Party which is supposedly pro-independence but whose leader Nicola Sturgeon uses the phrase "good global citizens"... the SNP gets the bulk of the vote.

The rest are those two parties you mentioned, except the Conservatives didn't get a big vote in Scotland because Thatcher was seen as pretty destructive, so they were third or fourth for a while. Labour used to be the main party in Scotland, but lost it due a lot of machine politicians. The Liberal Democrats have the only really safe seat(s) in Scotland (the Northern Isles - Orkney and Shetland) but have slidden from third to fourth.

There are also the Greens who have members of the Scottish Parliament, and a separate party from the English Greens. They used to be led by a man who looked like Doctor Who, but are now led by two people, an extremely woke and very nasty Canadian, who always has a smug grin on her face and an equally nasty atheist who is extremely anti-Mormon, who looks like he is chewing a wasp. He has attacked BYU having interns at the Scottish Parliament, and politicians for being various religions.

[Juliet]

I think they are all related. It seems you have two types of politicains... The ones who do the wrong thing and the ones who pretend to do the right thing but also do the wrong thing.

They have a factory line of them. Many of them are churned out through the World Economic Forum's Young Global Leaders programme, which has given us the likes of Jacinda Ardern in NZ, Justin Trudeau in Canada (although he inherited his job), Emmanuel Macron in France and Tony Blair in the UK. Also probably the very sinister Kurz in Austria who some think may be the "Big One" in the future.

There seem to be two main types -

* The suit who dresses "square" but very smartly, and is interchangeable with any number of others. Like Macron in France, Varadkar in Ireland. Maybe Biden. They make nice statements but introduce tighter laws.
* The clown/scapegoat - these are maverick types who have obvious character flaws who are useful in the sense that they can take all the blame for system failure onto themselves while everyone gets off scot free. Examples: Boris Johnson, Dubya. They generate a backlash, but love the money.

Also a third type, a kind of matronly or motherly woman (but often without children) who appeals to the middle classes - Merkel in Germany, Ardern in NZ.

Margaret Thatcher too.

Dubya..nice.

Sometimes I think it would be nice to get into the political world. But in truth I guess the closest I will get to the political world is a political science 101 class where I learned the U.S. is a democratic republic and in the U.K. your two parties are the opposite of us. (I don't understand that all the way).

I figure if all my kids have 3 kids each for the next twenty generations I will be the mother of 20 billion. So I guess that works as good as taking over the planet.

It gets more complicated in Scotland we actually have a four party system or did. The main party here is the Scottish National Party which is supposedly pro-independence but whose leader Nicola Sturgeon uses the phrase "good global citizens"... the SNP gets the bulk of the vote.

The rest are those two parties you mentioned, except the Conservatives didn't get a big vote in Scotland because Thatcher was seen as pretty destructive, so they were third or fourth for a while. Labour used to be the main party in Scotland, but lost it due a lot of machine politicians. The Liberal Democrats have the only really safe seat(s) in Scotland (the Northern Isles - Orkney and Shetland) but have slidden from third to fourth.

There are also the Greens who have members of the Scottish Parliament, and a separate party from the English Greens. They used to be led by a man who looked like Doctor Who, but are now led by two people, an extremely woke and very nasty Canadian, who always has a smug grin on her face and an equally nasty atheist who is extremely anti-Mormon, who looks like he is chewing a wasp. He has attacked BYU having interns at the Scottish Parliament, and politicians for being various religions.

You mentioned the Labour party and the Conservatives.... These are two different groups? Which one do you support more than the others?

[Niemand]

They have a factory line of them. Many of them are churned out through the World Economic Forum's Young Global Leaders programme, which has given us the likes of Jacinda Ardern in NZ, Justin Trudeau in Canada (although he inherited his job), Emmanuel Macron in France and Tony Blair in the UK. Also probably the very sinister Kurz in Austria who some think may be the "Big One" in the future.

There seem to be two main types -

* The suit who dresses "square" but very smartly, and is interchangeable with any number of others. Like Macron in France, Varadkar in Ireland. Maybe Biden. They make nice statements but introduce tighter laws.
* The clown/scapegoat - these are maverick types who have obvious character flaws who are useful in the sense that they can take all the blame for system failure onto themselves while everyone gets off scot free. Examples: Boris Johnson, Dubya. They generate a backlash, but love the money.

Also a third type, a kind of matronly or motherly woman (but often without children) who appeals to the middle classes - Merkel in Germany, Ardern in NZ.

Margaret Thatcher too.

Dubya..nice.

Sometimes I think it would be nice to get into the political world. But in truth I guess the closest I will get to the political world is a political science 101 class where I learned the U.S. is a democratic republic and in the U.K. your two parties are the opposite of us. (I don't understand that all the way).

I figure if all my kids have 3 kids each for the next twenty generations I will be the mother of 20 billion. So I guess that works as good as taking over the planet.

It gets more complicated in Scotland we actually have a four party system or did. The main party here is the Scottish National Party which is supposedly pro-independence but whose leader Nicola Sturgeon uses the phrase "good global citizens"... the SNP gets the bulk of the vote.

The rest are those two parties you mentioned, except the Conservatives didn't get a big vote in Scotland because Thatcher was seen as pretty destructive, so they were third or fourth for a while. Labour used to be the main party in Scotland, but lost it due a lot of machine politicians. The Liberal Democrats have the only really safe seat(s) in Scotland (the Northern Isles - Orkney and Shetland) but have slidden from third to fourth.

There are also the Greens who have members of the Scottish Parliament, and a separate party from the English Greens. They used to be led by a man who looked like Doctor Who, but are now led by two people, an extremely woke and very nasty Canadian, who always has a smug grin on her face and an equally nasty atheist who is extremely anti-Mormon, who looks like he is chewing a wasp. He has attacked BYU having interns at the Scottish Parliament, and politicians for being various religions.

You mentioned the Labour party and the Conservatives.... These are two different groups? Which one do you support more than the others?

I support neither, because I believe they have been bad for Scotland. The Conservatives did a number of things in Scotland in my younger days which were very destructive and are still remembered - they did this because they had few voters here, and ended up losing practically all representation for a while, but that has recovered. The Labour Party had the opposite problem, in some parts of Scotland, they were too comfortable and ran a one party state, more or less, and were very corrupt, and just awful. Since both of them have supported vaccine passports, I will likely never vote for them again.

I voted Labour in a local council election because they had a decent candidate here who I knew got things done, and was an active church goer (non-LDS), so the type of woman I wanted to represent me. Unfortunately, she didn't win again, but she was one of the few local politicians who isn't a complete chancer, and I knew people who knew her. Otherwise I don't touch Labour at all.

The Scottish National Party used to be the one I supported. I back independence, but they are awful now. They have been infiltrated by globalists, cultural Marxists and plain nasty careerists (which you find in all four parties.) They don't fight for Scotland like they claim but push toxic ideologies, attack free speech and undermine communities. And plus with their pushing of vaccine passports, I likely won't vote for them again either. They seem to be World Economic Forum shills now like the rest. They used to offer something different. Now same old, same old.

The Liberal Democrats... well their main campaigning slogan is to keep other parties out. They say a lot of nice things, but never do them when they have a sniff of power. Very much an old people's party.

As Robin Hood calls them, we have "opposames", which pretend to be different but push the same policies.

[Juliet]

Margaret Thatcher too.

Dubya..nice.

Sometimes I think it would be nice to get into the political world. But in truth I guess the closest I will get to the political world is a political science 101 class where I learned the U.S. is a democratic republic and in the U.K. your two parties are the opposite of us. (I don't understand that all the way).

I figure if all my kids have 3 kids each for the next twenty generations I will be the mother of 20 billion. So I guess that works as good as taking over the planet.

It gets more complicated in Scotland we actually have a four party system or did. The main party here is the Scottish National Party which is supposedly pro-independence but whose leader Nicola Sturgeon uses the phrase "good global citizens"... the SNP gets the bulk of the vote.

The rest are those two parties you mentioned, except the Conservatives didn't get a big vote in Scotland because Thatcher was seen as pretty destructive, so they were third or fourth for a while. Labour used to be the main party in Scotland, but lost it due a lot of machine politicians. The Liberal Democrats have the only really safe seat(s) in Scotland (the Northern Isles - Orkney and Shetland) but have slidden from third to fourth.

There are also the Greens who have members of the Scottish Parliament, and a separate party from the English Greens. They used to be led by a man who looked like Doctor Who, but are now led by two people, an extremely woke and very nasty Canadian, who always has a smug grin on her face and an equally nasty atheist who is extremely anti-Mormon, who looks like he is chewing a wasp. He has attacked BYU having interns at the Scottish Parliament, and politicians for being various religions.

You mentioned the Labour party and the Conservatives.... These are two different groups? Which one do you support more than the others?

I support neither, because I believe they have been bad for Scotland. The Conservatives did a number of things in Scotland in my younger days which were very destructive and are still remembered - they did this because they had few voters here, and ended up losing practically all representation for a while, but that has recovered. The Labour Party had the opposite problem, in some parts of Scotland, they were too comfortable and ran a one party state, more or less, and were very corrupt, and just awful. Since both of them have supported vaccine passports, I will likely never vote for them again.

I voted Labour in a local council election because they had a decent candidate here who I knew got things done, and was an active church goer (non-LDS), so the type of woman I wanted to represent me. Unfortunately, she didn't win again, but she was one of the few local politicians who isn't a complete chancer, and I knew people who knew her. Otherwise I don't touch Labour at all.

The Scottish National Party used to be the one I supported. I back independence, but they are awful now. They have been infiltrated by globalists, cultural Marxists and plain nasty careerists (which you find in all four parties.) They don't fight for Scotland like they claim but push toxic ideologies, attack free speech and undermine communities. And plus with their pushing of vaccine passports, I likely won't vote for them again either. They seem to be World Economic Forum shills now like the rest. They used to offer something different. Now same old, same old.

The Liberal Democrats... well their main campaigning slogan is to keep other parties out. They say a lot of nice things, but never do them when they have a sniff of power. Very much an old people's party.

As Robin Hood calls them, we have "opposames", which pretend to be different but push the same policies.

Well thank you, this was very informative.

[Niemand]

Well thank you, this was very informative.

The TLDR version is that I don't think any of the major parties represents me now. I'm sure Robin Hood is the same...

I look for decent candidates and often check their backgrounds. I don't vote for careerists/machine politicians most of the time and those with dodgy personal views. I have spoilt my ballot twice in recent elections because of this (but not the last Scottish election). I just write "none of the above" or "this is a spoilt ballot paper" on them. I think that is better than not voting although they don't distinguish us from the idiots who can't vote properly in the stats.

Unlike the Republicans stateside almost no major politicians have been speaking out. David Davies of the Conservatives is one of the few exceptions.

[Juliet]

Well thank you, this was very informative.

The TLDR version is that I don't think any of the major parties represents me now. I'm sure Robin Hood is the same...

I look for decent candidates and often check their backgrounds. I don't vote for careerists/machine politicians most of the time and those with dodgy personal views. I have spoilt my ballot twice in recent elections because of this (but not the last Scottish election). I just write "none of the above" or "this is a spoilt ballot paper" on them. I think that is better than not voting although they don't distinguish us from the idiots who can't vote properly in the stats.

Unlike the Republicans stateside almost no major politicians have been speaking out. David Davies of the Conservatives is one of the few exceptions.

I feel the same way. Apparently in our country Steve Brennon has a huge campaign with thousands of volunteers signing up to watch the election this time and make sure there is no funny business going on. That has to be fixed first.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... ar-AAS0cDE

In New Jersey, we had a truck driver beat out the incumbant for Senate President.
https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/a ... t/3378682/

I think that good people just need to do the paper work and get themselves on a ballot. Because they would be so much better than anyone from a political machine.

And if anyone is going to be a politician, I would say stay away from hospitals, no drinking, and keep armed guards around, don't let anyone close enough to stick you with a needle of something that will make you black out and come to with amnesia of what was just done to you. Those who stand to lose power don't play nice.

[Juliet]

You think Boris Johnson and Donald Trump are cousins?

Thank you for the very informative run down. It's nice to be aware of what is going on up there in the U.K.

They've got similar hair and are womanisers, and that's the main similarity. Oh, and they've both got an obvious case of Boarding School Syndome, where the person creates a kind of front which they use to deflect from criticism.

Boris has written articles on the world being overpopulated but has at least seven children by multiple women. I don't know what they see in him.

He poses as being pro-Brexit, but he attended the World Economic Forum while still mayor of London. He has also pushed for Turkey to join the European Union.

He has a very curious ancestry, mixture of Turkish journalist, English and South German aristocracy. He is connected up with the de Pfeifel family. A lot of these globalists have odd backgrounds. You start looking into Elon Musk or Kamala Harris and they have very odd things in their family tree.

https://halturnerradioshow.com/index.ph ... strictions

What the.... I told you they listen to this forum! Millions of people protesting do nothing but a bit of honest critique from good ol' freedom forum and the politicians are scrambling to comply!

[Niemand]

You think Boris Johnson and Donald Trump are cousins?

Thank you for the very informative run down. It's nice to be aware of what is going on up there in the U.K.

They've got similar hair and are womanisers, and that's the main similarity. Oh, and they've both got an obvious case of Boarding School Syndome, where the person creates a kind of front which they use to deflect from criticism.

Boris has written articles on the world being overpopulated but has at least seven children by multiple women. I don't know what they see in him.

He poses as being pro-Brexit, but he attended the World Economic Forum while still mayor of London. He has also pushed for Turkey to join the European Union.

He has a very curious ancestry, mixture of Turkish journalist, English and South German aristocracy. He is connected up with the de Pfeifel family. A lot of these globalists have odd backgrounds. You start looking into Elon Musk or Kamala Harris and they have very odd things in their family tree.

https://halturnerradioshow.com/index.ph ... strictions

What the.... I told you they listen to this forum! Millions of people protesting do nothing but a bit of honest critique from good ol' freedom forum and the politicians are scrambling to comply!

Kind of. I'm sceptical. The masks are still staying here. The vaccine passports also aren't disappearing in continental Europe. If I want to go to Spain, I've got to prove all that rubbish.

Boris' tactic is to let everyone run around and then pretend to make a sudden decision to take action. He's done this three times now.

I've a horrible idea that they're giving folk a breather and will start back up on it. Another variant in time for Christmas. It seems to be the pattern elsewhere. I see South Korea is removing the passports for certain activities which is a good thing, but until these disappear off the face of the Earth, I don't think we're free yet.