4 Ridiculous “Crimes” British Police Investigated Instead Of Preventing The Westminster Terrorist Attack

From Britain to the United States and beyond, police resources are stretched like never before. But instead of deciding to then use the means they have at their disposal in wiser ways, politicians and politically correct (or politically intimidated) police chiefs are opting to go after what amounts to little more than “thought crimes.” Jokes about “women in the kitchen” posted in Canada are even receiving considerable police attention in the United Kingdom, all while true, violent crimes like burglaries are being openly neglected by police leaders.

The tragedy this week at Westminster in London, which led to scores of people being mowed by an Islamic terrorist named Khalid Masood, is an example of incidents that the police should be trying to prevent more. And although the police do devote significant time to tracking terror suspects, their other “priorities,” motivated by SJW and feminist agitations, suggest they could be exerting themselves more in trying to stop real crimes, not the pet ideological projects of leftist extremists.

This perverted fascination with non-crimes, which at best can be called having bad manners, also endangers police themselves. The issuing of instructions to give violent offenders like robbers a wide berth in favor of prosecuting “online trolls” only encourages those with actual malice to offend further. British beat cops, most of whom are unarmed, are therefore exposed to greater threats than they should be, as is the general public.

So here are four categories of purported British crime that should not be warranting any investigation by police whatsoever:

1. Saying women are fat or suggesting they should be in the kitchen

Criticizing someone’s appearance is not something I usually recommend, especially if they cannot control it through disease or disability. Whilst there is nothing wrong with wanting to sleep with attractive women at the expense of unattractive women, going out of your way to mock someone’s bodily features is ill-advised. Return Of Kings, however, has rightfully drawn a line when it comes to the promotion of obesity by choice and demands that healthy heterosexual men find fat girls sexually appealing. The problem is that police in the UK are enforcing unofficial politeness laws, which only seem to protect people like offended feminist women, and digitally tracking down “offenders” so they can visit them in person.

Around the time of the “women’s marches,” Facebook critics of attention-seeking female SJWs pointed out that disproportionate numbers of the marchers rallying against “rape” were overweight and amongst the least likely to arouse anyone’s sexual interest, whether criminal or model citizen. This mirrors a number of other situations where women portray themselves as being attractive by pretending they are at a high risk of sexually-inspired violence. Meanwhile, other anti-feminist shitlords on Facebook said women were better off in the kitchen, an observation at least partially supported by happiness surveys showing females felt better in the age of the housewife.

The result? Triggered Canadian women contacted British police, who then tracked some men down and went to their doorsteps. The irony here is that if a man is ever called “ugly” or “a loser,” the state will not zealously prosecute the “offender” on his behalf. In fact, as you will see below, if a man is perceived as unattractive or not successful (or a woman just isn’t interested in small talk), the police can now label his approach a “hate crime.” Whereas local UK burglaries are now routinely ignored, despite the high risk that a thief will return to intimidate or re-victimize a homeowner, law enforcement has decided to go after men who have a 99.99% chance of never meeting those they criticize, let alone physically or sexually attacking them. I guess they temporarily forgot about terrorist sympathizers like Khalid Masood.

2. Men approaching women (with no threats or violence) being called “hate criminals”

Hate criminal!

Did you approach a woman in England recently and she didn’t like what you offered with your appearance and/or conversation? Chances are you can be described as a “hate criminal” by local police. Particularly in Nottingham, where this pathetic program was piloted, imagine how much time has been diverted from burglaries, serious assaults, and the investigation of terror suspects to cataloguing and rebuking men who simply try to talk to women. Paradoxically, British authorities weren’t so keen to publicly label Khalid Masood a hate criminal in recent years after he was deemed to be an Islamic radical, well before he killed innocent people.

In two months after the introduction of this policy, Nottingham police had arrested a grand total of two men for “public order offences and actual bodily harm” designated as “misogynistic” acts. The city itself numbers over 300,000 and attracts more people still as commuters to work, tourists, and students. Consequently, this is a ridiculously small number of people, though politicized directives from above will lead to the expansion of what constitutes so-called sexism against women on the streets.

3. Walking past women who accuse you of rape with absolutely zero evidence

“Rape” because a geriatric woman wants to feel sexually sought after.

Some time ago I brought you the story of Mark Pearson, who was falsely accused by actress Souad Faress over an alleged rape that was physically impossible for him to have committed. It turns out, in a development I did not cover in my original article, that Pearson was not shown the CCTV “evidence” against him until six months after his arrest. The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) bears significant responsibility for this debacle, too, but think about the general law enforcement resources unacceptably and absolutely wasted in this case.

Yet Pearson’s plight is not the only one. Though I am for police listening to complaints of rape, there is no doubt that most allegations involve nothing but the testimony of an accuser, sometimes many years after the claimed attack. Compare this to the information police accumulated about the Westminster terrorist Khalid Masood. MI5, Britain’s version of the FBI, had previously investigated Masood. There was always much more evidence that he was a potential terrorist than there is evidence suggesting that a man accused of rape is actually a rapist. But try telling that to the upper echelons of British law enforcement!

4. Criticizing open border policies or mass immigration

Let them in or you’re a racist!

Early last year Scottish police arrested a man for “offensive” comments about Syrian refugees. They used the spectacularly amorphous Communications Act and declined to elaborate on what he actually said. The Scottish legal system operates separately from England and Wales, but shares many features and, importantly, many of the saddening trends that elevate political correctness above common sense. The ability of British citizens to express concerns about rapidly declining social cohesion is not only significantly curtailed in modern times, but liable to get them imprisoned.

Another British man was arrested for asking a Muslim woman to “explain Brussels” (the terrorist attack of 2016). Notwithstanding that this is a more combative strategy for debating a topic, how this man found himself in the hands of law enforcement is a disgrace, especially as police termed his behavior “racial hatred” when Islam is, in fact, a religion. By that standard, a person criticizing Roman Catholicism should be prosecuted for anti-Irish, anti-Italian, or anti-Polish racism. I wonder how many would-be Khalid Masoods could have been looked at in the time it took to chase down and interrogate this man?

If the police can’t protect us, who will?

Wow, terrorism defeated!

No one should expect the police to counter every threat in society, including the specter of terrorist attacks. But when law enforcement is being consistently pushed to stop rather harmless social infractions or stifle freedom of expression, we have a problem. In addition to the run-of-the-mill criminals who benefit from such a focus, even more bloodthirsty terrorists greatly appreciate the lessened attention they get from the powers that be.

If the West is really serious about preventing mass fatalities and injuries from terrorist attacks, rather than just using them as an opportunity to change Facebook profile photos, the time is ripe for police forces to stop going after people who have done nothing warranting an official investigation.

Read More: British Police: Men Who Try To Get Laid Are Guilty Of Misogynistic “Hate Crimes”

177 thoughts on “4 Ridiculous “Crimes” British Police Investigated Instead Of Preventing The Westminster Terrorist Attack”

  1. The police are there to control the population, not to solve of stop crimes that harm worthless individuals. It’s all part of the governments plan to rule through fear.
    The government is moving towards open warfare against it’s citizens and the police are their troops.

    And if you were a cowardly policeman, who would you rather face?
    A Muslim terrorist armed with an AK47 and a kilo of plastic explosives?
    Or a middle class white guy, that called a woman a fat cow.

    1. The last bit of your comment nails it. Until the police fear the middle aged white man more, expect continued prosecutions on grounds of hurt feelings.

      1. A couple of things:
        1. The police are just doing their job. A lot of them, privately, share a significant number of our political positions but their hands are tied by rules, codes, laws, and PC bullshit.
        2. Remember, “When the people fears the government….” There is only one way to put the fear of god into the government, and its not with candles and Facebook.

        1. Let’s put it this way. There is a lot of discontent squashed by the government. But there is a tipping point after which no amount of police can suppress dissidents, just look at the Soviet Union and such.
          Spreading our worldview is the most imortant thing. We need parallel systems, like Muslims in the West. We need our own media and memes, as well as our own currency (Bitcoin) and afterwards the action in the real world is icing on the cake. It is the culmination of cultural warfare.

        2. The police always seemed to be particularly gleeful and smirking when they were chasing me. (Educated, middle class, middle aged white man)

        3. I like the NorthWest front concept, but I don’t think it is an efficient model. It has been tried on a small scale by some WNs and it doesn’t pick up steam.
          It would be useful in case of a Civil War, but not until then.
          The Weev approach is better. Radicalize a significant chunk on the right and become the new counter-culture, like the 68ers. You need 5% of the population to be on board with something like Global White Supremacy, or hardcore hatred of the left. Then ultra-radical right-wing politicians gain a few seats and then it’s just a matter of time until you get to the Night of Long Knives scenario.
          Most people are apathetic, and things change overnight, we just need critical mass.

        4. The separatist model doesn’t pick up steam because ‘cultural’ struggle is safer. A lot of people in the racially conscious right have things to lose (status, family, money), are lazy or are simply cowards. Tapping on a keyboard, writing clever essays and doing conferences and dinner parties is safer than open rebellion against the US government. I wish them godspeed but that’s a dead end.
          Also, I and most of the racially conscious right ARE NOT ‘white supremacist’. We don’t want to rule over other races; we want total separation from them.

        5. I did not mean it seriously. I was obviously exaggerating with the “Global White Supremacy” stuff.
          Real life action like all old school WN marches did not get us far. Neither did Jarod Taylor’s conferences.
          What we need is the DailyStormer /pol/ model + some real life activism that names the Jew as well as the whole counterculture thing.
          That’s what seems to work if you ask me. Not pretending anyone will let Whites live alone until we completely discredit and remove them from power.

        6. I think Trump, /pol/, Sam Hyde, Murdoch Murdoch, Richard Spencer, BlackPigeonSpeaks, and Pepe did the most for WN since I’ve started paying attention to it imo.
          It can’t just be hardcore fascists or delicate intellectuals. Stefan Molyneux-type analysis is necessary, but insufficient.

        7. 1. Yes, but that doesn’t get a pass from me. In the military, someone who obeys orders to kill civilians could claim he was just doing his job, but that’s no excuse. He is duty bound to the constitution and has an obligation to disobey unlawful orders. Even more so for cops as police have “prosecutorial discretion” and can choose whether to charge someone with an offense or not. If you’re doing something morally indefensible, there is only so long that you can hide behind the law.
          2. I agree.

        8. I think you’re right that only a very small percentage would have to go that way to tip the situation, and the powers that be are fighting extremely hard to stop that happen, as they probably know it too. Man, it’s a pity the left is going to such extremes, and using underhand methods to push their agenda. If something happens like you suggest above a reasonable chunk of the political middle would be quietly pleased.

        9. “Rules for Radicals” contains a lot of Communist BS, but a core of good tactical advice, as well.

      2. The ‘Go after the soft touch middle class white guy’ attitude filters down to the day-to-day low-level stuff too.
        When I was robbed at knifepoint (there was CCTV and possibly fingerprints on the knife so it’s not like all they had to go on in IDing the perp was a vague description) and the police’s response was “We don’t have the resources to investigate; here’s your crime number, now sod off.” This isn’t a recent phenomenon either. Back in the good ol’ days when ‘smash the window, grab the radio’ thefts were common my friend’s car was the victim of such a crime. The police’s lack of interest was astounding; they seemed genuinely surprised that my friend wasn’t satisfied with the investigation being opened and shut with him receiving a crime reference number to pass to his insurer.
        However, there is one crime which the police throw all their resources behind solving; the sad degenerates who commit this crime will be hounded to the ends of the earth.
        What is this crime so bad that the police view it as the worst crime one could ever commit? Murder? Child molestation? Aggravated arson?
        Nope. In the eyes of those who enforce the law, the worst crime a person could ever commit is speeding. Parking violations come in at a close second, mind.

        1. Tickets = $ in. Investigations = $ out. That’s really all you need to know about what police are primarily about.

        2. This also explains why police are so eager to go after drug users and sellers. Officially they give reasons like “Drug addicts are likely to commit theft to fund their habit” and “Drug users need to be protected from the negative health effects of their own poor choices” etc. This might be true for drugs like heroin and crack, but have you ever met a violent thug who burgles as a result of his penchant for cannabis? I’m sure there are some out there, but they’re a small minority of users and a far smaller proportion than comparably antisocial alkies.
          To demonstrate the real reason, a story told by the aforementioned friend some years later:
          My friend was driving along minding his own business one evening. He had a moderate amount of weed in his car which he planned to smoke later. He wasn’t driving while high and the amount was small enough that it was obviously only for his personal use. The cops were running a DUI checkpoint. Although the breathalyser didn’t flag him up as being drunk – nor even having had a drink – somehow one thing led to another and the cops found his stash.
          They said “We’re going to confiscate this either way, but what happens next is up to you. If you insist we go down the official route we’ll have to take you to the station and you’ll get an official caution. But I’m sure you don’t want to waste your evening and have a mark against you, and we don’t want to spend all night filling in the paperwork. So how about we dispose of your contraband here and now then we can all go about our business.”
          My friend agreed, and the officers made a big show of ‘disposing’ of the cannabis. But it was dark enough that they could easily have stashed it. That’s what my friend and I reckon they did; stashed it so they could sell it on later. Pound to a penny a large proportion of cops who catch someone with drugs let the druggie off with a warning after confiscating the drugs; the druggie is so relieved they got off easy that they don’t make a fuss and the cop is quids in when he sells the gear on.

    2. How strange it is ! Filthy canadian pussies complain to the British police because someone called them “fat” and “should be in the kitchen” ! Even strange is the police “responding” to these kind of preposterous complaints by pussies who did “slut walks” !!
      Why we MEN are letting this happen !? Why we are keeping quite !? I guess we are BUSY in: Earning “bread & butter”, Keeping our families “safe & happy”, Contributing positively for the good of “society”, Drilling roads under the “red hot sun”, Mining for coal risking our “health & lives”, Fishing in dangerous zones to “feed the people”, Working in the sewage department doing the “dirty job”, Innovating & pioneering the “technology”, Establishing businesses & corporations to create “employment opportunities”, Protecting the borders from “illegal immigration”, Fighting with the “terrorists”, Facing false sexual “harassments” & rape “accusations”, Legal battles for un-deserved “alimony”, …. !!
      I wonder how these filthy pussies could find the TIME for “slut walks”, “walking bare chested”, “pink saturdays”, “mindless shopping spree”, etc. etc. etc.
      I don’t know why the leftists & pussies are provoking the MASCULINITY ! This reminds me of a saying:
      “At time of destruction, mind goes mad”
      “Those whom God wishes to destroy, he first makes mad.”

  2. I think this PC madness will continue untill something happends that drastically reduces quality of life in the West. But even then even if patriarchy returns, how do you sustain in? Easy life = Liberalism.

    1. Won’t happen for quite some time as long globalist control power. It is much easier to bolster the market on the back end through a marginal investment than to allow citizens the ability to believe their individual actions warrant any change on the political and social sphere.
      It won’t be until men meet to start a grassroots influence within their inner circles and we expand this idea to a global sphere, that the government will have no choice but to relent. Until then the globalist/liberals will rule the day.

    2. Unless the horde bombs the Big Ben or the Louvre there won’t be a response against this shit.
      But looking at 9/11 and comparing it to how the US is now, perhaps not even then.

  3. This is an article I’ve been waiting for. Western governments are forcing multiculturalism (on to the nations they are supposed to represent the interests of) illegally and against the will of the host population. All of this while they are telling police chiefs to let muslims, social justice radicals, feminists, and other tentacles of the leftist horde have free reign of violence and political upheaval.
    I find it hysterical that leftists who think they are the free thinking deviants are actually acting as the Orwellian useful idiots that are stifling all forms of freedom and giving absolute power to the feds that are trying to displace them from their own country. It’s like the worst case of Stockholm Syndrome in the continuum of human existence.
    Are the people getting charged for these absurd ‘crimes’ suing the government on the grounds that these charges are a sickening violation of their basic human rights? Can anyone tell me why our own fucking governments are against us?

    1. Technically speaking, its not the western governments but the real powers behind them. Adrian Salbuchi, Argentinian political analyst, makes the distinction between the Formal Power (States, Governments) and the Real Power (international organizations like the CFR, international banks like Goldman Sachs, influential people like Soros).
      The Formal Powers are just the CEO’s, while the Real Powers are the Board of Directors, the first only execute the directives that comes from the former.

      1. Yeah that seems to be the prevailing opinion of this community, treasonous unelected bureaucrats furthering their own interests at the expense of everyone else. Would you happen to have a link to Salbuchi’s article?
        What still puzzles me is why they want all of the political upheaval. These scumbags were billionaires before the culture war, the peacetime economy is what made them rich. What’s with all the division propaganda?

        1. Once money becomes nearly fictional in your life, iow, you have so much that everything can be bought and you still wouldn’t even affect your bottom line, then power enters to fill the void to give their lives direction. At least that’s what it seems to be to me, because what else really would motivate somebody to intentionally destroy a system that gives them everything in life on a silver platter?

        2. That pencil pusher?? If you want to be effective against the billionaires, Bruce Wayne is who you want. Clark Kent?? Pffft

        3. An interesting theory, and probably correct. But could they not attain a similar amount of power and influence without all of the cultural Marxist idiocy?

        4. You’d think. My thought is that since cultural and socio-economic Marxism is what was taught and advocated when they were in college, they go with it by default. Or who really knows? I genuinely don’t understand people’s thirst to put others in chains, or the masses desire to be put back into the same thrall, slavery and miserable conditions that we only recently escaped from the last two centuries. The bulk of human history until 200 years ago was written in pain and suffering.
          Fun side note, a kid and his dad came into a bar where I was last year. Kid graduated economics. I congratulated him and offered to buy him a drink, and while it was being poured I asked who his favorite economist was. “Karl Marx” I called the waitress over and told her quite clearly “Never mind, I won’t be buying that drink after all”. Fuck these people.

        5. Most of Salbuchi’s writings are in spanish. In this old video (in english) he talks a little about the subject:

          About why they do it, I agree partially with Ghost of Jefferson’s answer. They want power in order to implement a specific agenda: the NWO.

        6. “He likes torturing animals…this kid has CEO or politician written all over him. We have to get him into an Ivy League school”- HS guidance counselor

        7. A man in the 30s said it best in a book called Mein Kampf.
          Certain (((rootless Globalists))) care more than just profit, but seek the racial extermination of Europeans to seat themselves as World leaders of a One World Government due to their egomania.
          Soros is not driven by profits, that’s for sure. Neither are the makers of the new Ghostbusters. They want cultural dominance and in the end they want to be able to rule in the open and be worshiped as gods.

        8. These people view us as parasites. Worms. They want to phase us all out eventually, and reduce the population, largely to preserve the beauty of the earth. The end goal is, for all intents and purposes, to become demigods.

        9. yeesh. reminds me of that Dylan lryic from “Masters of War”
          All the money you make will never buy back your soul

        10. It certainly looks like this is the case. What doesn’t make sense is why they are favoring volatile cultures with high birth rates to power a depopulation agenda. Why do you think they aren’t supporting higher IQ and more docile westerners for a smoother transition? It seems like that would be the best course of action if that is indeed what they are trying to do. Do lower IQ cultures simply make better puppets? If so, how are they going to stifle their birth rates?

        11. Eventually they’ll terminate the imported class, whether through sterilization or pure war.

        12. My wife’s grandmother reached 101 and passed away one week after her 101st birthday. She had no diseases or operations, it was simply time to pass on. She was of German stock and never had a lot of money, but she did raise 4 children and support her husband who was a farmer all of his life.
          At her funeral a large gathering turned out of good, decent, simple folk in the Lutheran Church where she attended since being a child. The church pealed the bells in the town 101 times in her honor as she was driven to the cemetery.
          That…thing…in your picture died after fighting death tooth and nail; he is hated, despised and many of us spit on his memory.
          Of the two lives, I know which one I’d rather lead.

        13. They already started working on that with hCG (sterilization drug) laced Tetanus vaccines in Africa, the Philippines & Nicaragua. These vaccines were provided by the Gates foundation and World Health(?) Organization. There were administered to women age 14 – 25. This is what Bill Gates alluded to in his Ted talk when he mentioned vaccination as a path to population control. Don’t worry, they haven’t just singled out those of European decent; it’s multipronged attack strategy against humanity in general carried out on various fronts with different tactics. The end game is a “sustainable” population of 500 million worldwide. Enough for the elite to have their artisans, craftsmen and servants; nothing more.

        14. It’s a Utopian scheme, started decades ago, and no one currently alive will ever see it to fruition. Of course, don’t be surprised if these people put themselves on ice.

        15. hahaha good on ya. Would have loved to see the look on the kids face. Not completely his fault I guess, they start the brainwashing early these days… Shame he wasn’t intelligent enough to see through it.

        16. It’s the money honey. Like Steve Jobs getting a new liver when others were left waiting. Dude had terminal cancer and he got a liver transplant!!

        17. Some sources are saying this curmudgeon faked his death. What do you think, valid? Did they transfer his consciousness into windows 10? lmao

        18. Friedman, Sowell, Hayek or anyone from the Austrian school.
          Marx was full of shit, but grifters love him.

        19. I am glad to see him go. An enemy to freedom loving people the world over. Fuck you, David Rockefeller.

    2. Because that is the nature of the governmental apparatus. This whole “government is supposed to protect the people” is just bullshit they tell you in school so you’ll grow up to be a good little slave and give Master your cotton without a fight. Government isn’t supposed to protect you. They just want you to believe that so it is easier to rob you.

      1. I partly agree, but that still doesn’t fully explain why they are favoring and funding all of the groups that hate the host culture. Political instability puts holes in the profit margins. Can any of this really be helping their quest for power?

        1. Yes and no.
          There are 2 types of Globalists : pure mercantilists and Jews.
          Mercantilists care about profits and support women in the workforce and open borders in order to get more labor and move to where business is cheaper. But that’s where it stops
          Jews go beyond pure profit and finance anti-White agitators, promote degeneracy like homosexuals and transsexuals and denigrate Western culture because they seek to eradicate the White race, their biggest enemy.

        2. Supposing this is true, why has the only culture that accepts all ethnicities and ideologies been marked for death by the alleged Jewish elite? What is going to come out of this is all western nations becoming islamic republics where systematic murder of Jews will be state sponsored and legal. Do they not fear the end game of their own policy?

        3. My take is that the elite globalist Jews (e.g., Soros, Rothschilds) are Jews in name only. They could care less about the rank and file Jews who suffer.
          however, due to Jewish ethnocentrism and elitism, they tend to pull in Jewish organizations readily by appealing to their baser drives. Hence the ADL being the major sponsor of immigration reform in the USA that led to third world waves hitting American shores. Diminishing the number of whites sounds like a great idea, until you see the consequences. Jews fleeing France, etc etc.

        4. >Do they not fear the end game of their own policy?
          They have an “escape valve”, though. If things indeed do become that bad, Jews will simply move to Israel (many have already fled from Europe to Israel). The Jewish power players know that Israel is their safety net.
          For decades, the Israeli lobby in America has ensured that their enemies in the Middle East were destabilized, ensuring their hegemony and ultimate safety in the region; not to mention the fact that they are a nuclear-armed state.
          Jewish neocons within the Clinton, Bush, and Obama administrations dominated our foreign policy direction with “think tanks” like Project for a New American Century (PNAC), and lobby groups like AIPAC helped deliver them the loyalty (and souls) of our Congress members.
          Nearly every move we made in the Middle East under these administrations was good for Israel, and was done at the expense (in the trillions) of American taxpayers. It almost hurts me to type this, but we essentially funded the “getaway plan” for the enemy tribe in our midst.

        5. “Jewish neocons within the Clinton, Bush, and Obama administrations dominated our foreign policy direction with “think tanks” like Project for a New American Century (PNAC), and lobby groups like AIPAC helped deliver them the loyalty (and souls) of our Congress members.”
          If you look up the position paper “A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm” (1996), written by a group of Israeli-American dual citizens for Israeli PM Netanyahu, you will see the PNAC positions, and later US strategy in the Middle East, prefigured almost exactly. Subvert, break up, or destroy the countries surrounding Israel. Even the order of the countries to be targeted is the same– Iraq, Libya, Syria…
          Comparing the names of the dual-citizen authors of “A Clean Break” with the names of the dual-citizens high in the W administration who pushed for the Iraq War can be enlightening as well. Many of them are the same people.
          PNAC, of course, is the group founded by notorious neocons (((Robert Kagan))) and (((William Kristol))), that produced the infamous plan entitled “Rebuilding America’s Defenses: Strategies, Forces and Resources for a New Century,” It’s a little difficult to find on the interwebz these days, for some reason. This plan advocated for major increases in US defense spending, as well as (in line with the goals of “A Clean Break), attacking many of Israel’s perceived enemies in the Middle East. Published in September of 2000, “Rebuilding” was perhaps most notable for the sentence “The process of transformation is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event — like a new Pearl Harbor.” Interesting.
          Of course, this idea of paving the way for Greater Israel by subverting and destroying the surrounding countries, at least in part through use of the American golem, goes even farther back– at least to the Yinon Plan (1980s).
          Doing a search for “Samson option” can also be edifying for those who might think that the Tribe is capable of gratitude.

        6. Thanks for the additional info, Smash.
          A book by David Icke called “Alice in Wonderland and the World Trade Center Disaster” is the book that sent me down the so-called “rabbit hole”. Of course, Icke either ignores or deliberately avoids the (((elephant in the room))) and goes into tin-foil tier theories about reptilian and “Illuminati” overlords.
          That said, after becoming aware of the JQ and then ultimately understanding the history of Jewish/Gentile relations, this presentation by David Icke is actually VERY interesting.

          What’s so interesting (almost humorous) is that he names Jew after Jew during the presentation, and even correctly identifies that the (((media))) helped program the American public for the desired reaction to 9/11. Of course though, instead of bundling everything together with the JQ, he uses a combination of “globalists/Illuminati/reptilian” scapegoats with seemingly no ethnic/racial link. This would be the proper link that ties together the media, the banks, and the neocons behind the ME wars.
          When you gave that quote, “The process of transformation is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event — like a new Pearl Harbor.”, I was reminded of Icke’s presentation, as he uses that quote at about the 12:30 minute mark.
          I’ll leave the video for you to watch if you are interested, as a person who is wise to the JQ will find it rather useful to help tie things together and possibly lead to new enlightenment on our current situation.

        7. Thanks. I’ve got a low tolerance for info in video form– it seems to take forever compared to reading for ideas/ political stuff, although it’s great for practical things. I’ll see how much I can get through on 2x. My impression of Icke, from my limited experience, is that he’s sort of the Alex Jones/ InfoWars type of controlled opposition– he’s got enough truth there to keep the interest of a lot of people who sense that there’s something wrong with the standard narrative, but it’s mixed in with a lot of really weird stuff, which serves the dual purpose of misleading his listeners/ readers, and marking them as obviously crazy from the normie standpoint.
          Whether this type of partial truth mixed with craziness is a deliberate strategy, funded from higher up, or a result of suppressing those who address the JQ directly, while allowing those who take this sort of approach to flourish (relatively speaking) is another question. The comments on this sort of site, as well as sites on the right edge of the mainstream, are potentially fertile ground for sowing a few seeds on the JQ. Of course, they know it, which is why Breitbart has so many hasbara/ JIDF shills on any topic remotely related to the Tribe/ Palestine/ muh holyco$t.
          On the particular issue of Iraq/ Syria/ etc., the “No blood for oil!”/ “evil, greedy oil companies are behind all of these Middle East wars!” is a back up explanation for those who realize that “muh democracy!” let alone rational US national interests, doesn’t provide anything approaching an adequate explanation for our Middle East adventures. A lot of people fall for it, especially leftists. Of course, it’s easy to refute this with a simple question, such as “How many oil company executives served in the W administration, and pushed for the Iraq war?” “How many Israeli-American, dual-citizen jews did the same?” No one in the legacy media would ever dare to ask that question, though.
          I don’t think anyone could write a book laying out the political power of the oil lobby, and end up with anything even a fraction as convincing as Mearsheimer and Walt’s “The Israel Lobby and US Foreign Policy, ” which bends over backwards to avoid the appearance of “anti-semitism,” but is remarkably convincing nonetheless. And of course, no matter how fair one tries to be, if the facts are “anti-semitic,” as they are when one points out the power of AIPAC/ the Israel lobby, then truth is no defense. Mearsheimer and Walt were vilified in the legacy media for pointing out the man behind the curtain.

        8. Reading your post on the video you dubbed a “Bible Prophecy” type, which I’ve yet to check out, I thought to share with you a few things that came to mind. Where to begin. Albert Pike’s prophecies. Friend and others say it’s not much more than a hoax. Interesting nonetheless.
          Biblical and Islamic scriptures both link the second coming of Jesus with the city of Damascus. Quick Google search reveals there are plenty of articles penned on the subject. One piece suggests some Christians point to Isaiah 17:1, which states:
          The burden of Damascus. Behold, Damascus is taken away from being a city, and it shall be a ruinous heap. (King James version)
          Not sure you’ll like this one much but there’s also the blind Bulgarian clairvoyant, who was known as “Nostradamus from the Balkans”
          Moving on, this is well worth the read I want you to give it.
          You’d think at this stage in the war, it’d become clearer that the more outside involvement there is in Syria, the less likely a speedy solution will be found. The more Syrians will die. Friend says hey, at least Britain has no intention of getting involved in airstrikes. The Commons vote in 2013 is still binding, although the liberal democrats are busy banging the war drums. Russia has its own strategic interests. America and Israel have theirs. Those interests have no regard for human life. It may just work out in such a way that America and Russia “do a deal” so they both get what they want. I’m not sure if Russia will be prepared to throw Assad under the bus to achieve their objectives. America, however, will please the Jewish lobby. Israel no doing sees an American and Russian detente as being crucial for their security interests. Yesterday Trump hit Syria again, but this time rebel forces were hit on what was supposed to be a strike against ISIS. You had pro-Trump folks assuring everyone it was just a token strike and that Russia was made aware of it before it happened the first time round. Now Trump is hitting the rebels and ISIS and Assad. According to the Syrian military the bomb they dropped killed over 100 people. But they’ll stay steady trying to pump out excuses for him. It’s a strange world we live in where those who are facing reality are shunned as taking a defeatist approach.
          I understand now why you and others oppose miscegenation so vehemently. You might recall I spoke about the importance of sexual purity over racial purity. At the time I wondered why people should say “no race mixing” but not “no sex before marriage”. It implied, to me anyway, that these people were saying it was okay to sleep around so long as you were sleeping with White men only. My Polish friend’s mum tells us preserve your blonde genes. Have blonde kids when it’s time. So I raised the miscegenation issue with her and she suggested the reasoning behind it all is likely that should these girls end up pregnant at some point in their endeavours at least the kid will be White if they’re affiliating with White men only. Who knows. I suppose it’s not so much that most men are unmanly than that they learn to tolerate what they must when that’s all the choice they have. You can’t stop certain women from being promiscuous or certain men from engaging in the same. Such things as women having affairs and men not caring so long as they get what they want from the adulteress are part of life but you raise an important point. It is up to men to set the standard for what is and isn’t acceptable as far the behaviour of women is concerned. A little healthy misogyny is preferred to the slavish worship of women for being women. If you know you know.
          I find it funny the way some people are comfortable just posting online and when others, like you, suggest hard line or what is in their eyes extreme measures to combat the ills facing our society even if only at a personal level they balk at the solutions and suggestions. Sad that women are failing to realise their Divine roles as mothers. How are we to fix the outside world when we look to people put in positions of leadership to shut us up the way pacifiers are given to babies all while being completely incapable of making the first changes in ourselves. Can’t even start at home but they’re mad about saving what’s left of this crumbling civilisation. Discussion is important and healthy but eventually there will come a time when people won’t be able to afford simply sitting back and commenting on things.

        9. Posted. No telling if it’ll make its way to you in the form of a notification or sit in my comment history Marked as Spam like the other 6. I did this to myself. If after the fuss I’ve made over it the post doesn’t go through I think I might just give up on bothering you about it.

        10. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/cda254ad5a06cdec902a3dbaf81094cea9a142486a851015ff411e1b58d00cb7.png https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/21de1eb528cbb94bb11fe2c89f756e4c4017a75df38824041e09644aabbc8c79.png https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/a81b5640bc128d13057ed052e551f6ace734128df48381ee460f9dd9f9d57f8a.png
          I doubt what I had to say even made it into your notifications to begin with. It’s the oddest thing. I will post the comment and it’s looking at me like hey, it’s okay, don’t frown at me. I’m here to stay. I go away. Come back only to be told psyche! I wasn’t sure what to do. The first time it happened. What else could I do? I chose another thread and then another open, inactive one a few days later. Same thing each time. Not a time consuming activity given I’m only copy & pasting it. Quite beyond being baffed now. It’s belated, the Trump part where I’m referring to “yesterday” which isn’t today’s or yesterday’s yesterday but the day I wrote you the reply’s yesterday. Still haven’t watched the video by the Evangelist. I wanted to have you cue me in on what the portentous sign is but at the same time didn’t really want you to reply. The reason why I skipped sites where I considered it was likely that I would get comments on my comment. Avoiding active threads. I know that’s the whole point of this place but I don’t have the patience or enthusiasm for entertaining replies from people my comment wasn’t intended for who I came to realise when I was speaking to Joseph weren’t looking to have a discussion or take an interest in answering my questions so much as for excuses to talk, well, bull dung. I want to get away with not saying the exact same things as everyone else. Had written a little something out on Depeche Mode last night before re-posting it with the original. Plan was to tell you that you may wish to bookmark the links but the problem might be the reading material I’ve tried to share. Whoever knows! It was getting itchy fingers reading some of your posts led me to get back on Disqus and write you this. The comment will go with the account. Let me try a different approach with the doomed for spam comment.

  4. We live in a time when the state’s purpose is inverted. What once protected us – today it fights us, what once kept law – now keeps anarchy, what once enlightened us – today it keeps us in the dark and what once gave us purpose – today it gives us only despair.
    The hippies of may ’68 were never taken seriously enough. They openly said that education was indoctrination and voila they made it be only indoctrination. Modern education offers no useful knowledge but only in vestigial form. Through this process they made sure that the knew generation of politicians and lawmakers would have been on their side.
    Even worse than that the previous institutions have failed to protect from that rise and even worse did allow them to start initially. Ask yourself, what has the constitution, any constitution, really protected? Has it protected school prayers? Has it protected free speech? Has it protected the borders? The police and the citizens? To what has it not fail in the end? That I say having read 4 constitutions: the Greek, American, Russian and Weimar (it was in the appendix of Carl Schmitt’s Constitutional theory, which I read in preparation). In the end the American Constitution not only did NOT bar people from destroying the country’s traditions and character, but for the European ones they either have just failed to protect the countries or even have been helping to force entry to national saboteurs in the worst case.
    The problem why this happens is humanism, the god-less religion that puts man at the center of the universe and structures it’s conception of the world around humans. This doesn’t sound as bad at the start, in truth it sounds as a very good idea! There is a problem though: what is the holier human if human life is understood as being of infinite and equal worth and holiness at the same time! It creates the snow-flake paradox, under which if all are unique and equal, then no one is unique! In the end due to the influence of the echoing Frankfurt school we have been substituted for the more beautiful human beings that exist beyond us.
    But today beauty is understood by how more lowlier or animal-like the human is. The more stupid, impolite and immoral a human is he is being seen as a fugitive of the unequallness of his own society: a victim of an oppressive system. The bad woman, the one you want far away from your kids or your wife, is the novo-femina, the new woman, who inverts whatever once was holy and gracious to unholy and evil and what was repulsive, ugly and bad to attractive, beautiful and good in other words: the feminist.
    But do not be stuck with the example, which I used mostly to tie to the site’s thematic. Once only did humanism was the base for a whole society: in France after the French revolution, before the reign of terror by Robespierre, who later got overthrown by Napoleon who beheaded him with the use of the guillotine. To give an idea of how that system worked imagine that you got a lender who owes you money that he has no problem to give them to you but because his human rights are hit he refuses, goes to court and wins. Also think if every criminal did object to his punishment as being restrictive of his rights, for anything while having legitimate chances to win. In short if a human damages a human, damaging that human for damaging, in any way, another human is worse than leaving that human free for his crime.
    It hits the classic if all have infinite worth, then they have NO worth if all are different but equal, how can they be different*. In the end you, your parents, your friends, your wife and your children are being put to the same bin that all the scum of the Earth are being put. In short a drug dealer, a thief or a legitimate rapist (Muslims are allowed to rape in Sweden, Germany and England but not Europeans) are regarded as high as you and your loved ones by the state and the intellectual, of the modern times! Even worse this makes the hysterics and the criminals more equal than you. When the afforementioned people become the state their inner inefficiencies and corruption arise and build a state to their image. That of inverted eudaimonia (the Aristotelic conception of happiness as a good balanced state of being).
    The system of the modern times was refered to as anarcho-tyranny: Anarcho cause it is an anarchy, but tyranny because it’s laws enforce anarchy which is a lack of system and does not stop order from developing.
    *Differences occur in quantity( which indicates scarcity. i.e. a welder is useful but by virtue of being more common than an inventor he is regarded of lower position) and quality (a good welder versus a bad welder) besides mode, or else the difference between a welder and plumber or that between Newton and lavoisier (read the wikipedia entry: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antoine_Lavoisier , it is a disgrace not to know the first chemist and his sad fate and the reason for it) i.e. both are worker/scientists but they do different things, hence useful in different ways.
    I forgot to add the difference between types: or that between a worker and a scientist.

    1. Anarcho-Tyranny? That is two opposing concepts. How can you have Tyranny while simultaneously live under a system of no rulers? Anarchy literally means no rulers. Without rulers, how can there be tryanny? You don’t have to make up words to make a point.

      1. Brah, it’s an imperfect term, but is a popular one. That’s it’s current meaning, deal with it.

        1. You sound like those retards that use the word “irregardless” then justify it by saying, “Well, it’s in the dictionary”.
          If a term is so imperfect that is its completely wrong by its own definition, then it should be discarded, not embraced. Just because it is “popular” doesn’t mean it’s right. It just means a lot of people are wrong.

    1. Don’t count it down and out yet. Unlike places like Germany and Sweden, you’ll still find nationalist Englishmen who are not afraid to step forward. The Brexit is something that could only happen in Britain as other European nations like Germany, France, Sweden etc. are so far gone that there’s no will to fight left.

  5. Do you really think the Euro authorities devote much time to tracking the usual suspects? Some intel guy over there said they need to devote at least 11 people to properly surveil a potential problem citizen/refugee/whatever- they dont have the manpower

    1. They don’t have to track down every person, all they have to do is a few every year and then ensure that it gets well publicized.

        1. They wouldn’t let going out and “helping women with the police” air?

      1. The media publicizes thwarted attacks already, or am I misunderstanding what you are getting at?

        1. I’m just saying that it doesn’t have to be a lot, and that they can in fact focus those eleven people once or twice a year in order to maintain the illusion of “they’re watching you!”. No need for a full time staff or anything when fear will do the work for you.

        1. I know its gotten nuts over there but in the interest of objectivity let me point out:
          “A man in Stockholm accused of, AMONG OTHER THINGS to have harassed a group of women with bacon on a commuter train”
          Sounds to me that he was being a dik in general, and the bacon was just another prop.

        2. Do you think the Swedish authorities arrested him for being a dick or for being “racist” ?
          What do you think they really care about ?
          Muslim dicks never get much attention.

        3. Pork is a sort of cultural thing in that corner of Europe so with the Muslim push to eliminate it from shops, school lunches, etc, inevitably there will be a backlash. This month, a Danish couple were beaten for ordering ham on their pizza. The same happened late last year in France. The Danish woman was beaten so severely she lost hearing in one ear. Is that a hate crime against women, I wonder?

        4. “the Muslim push to eliminate it from shops, school lunches, etc,”
          If its really as bad as you say, this crap must stop.

    1. Do these people even know what fascism means? We have been a mix of fascism and socialism for many many decades

        1. Slightly off topic (but still about British Laws),
          Keira was topless in a really crap film “The Hole” (2001) when she was only 16, owning this film in the UK would technically make you a pedophile and liable to arrest. and on the sex offenders register for life. (Against the law to posses any media of under 18s in a sexual context in the UK).
          Same for the movie “American Beauty”, chubby bird (shit, now I’ve done an online hate crime) with big tits only 17. (Surprisingly the skinny one was absolutely legal)
          In the UK you can legally have sex with a 16 year old girl ….. but if you take sexy photos of her on your mobile phone, they can arrest and charge you as a pedophile (Yeah, an 18yo boy got convicted for having sexy photos of his 16yo gf on his mobile phone).
          British Law has been a bit bonkers for many years.

        2. “chubby”
          Yeah, because if it isn’t built like a 12 year old boy, it’s fat.

        3. Yeah, I know. He spends a lot of time really making this site look bad, so I like to post to his stupidity now and then just to make the point.

        4. I suppose things like that should be called out, even if only for the benefit of others. Also, why give hysterical feminists more reason to screech? That’s a rare legit reason.
          I’ve seen that film. Mena was gorgeous and not chubby. But I think PJ meant the actress playing her friend? The daughter, I mean.

    2. LOL!
      Has to be parody. She doesn’t even have a New England, let alone a Boston accent. She sounds like she’s from Indiana.

      1. even mark dice – who makes parodies can’t tell:
        “Mark Dice2 days ago
        Is this a parody, or are they serious? It’s too hard to tell anymore!!! Leftists ARE this insane!”
        It also contains that scene of the 4 dudes beating up the trump guy after the little feminazicommielarazapsycho was hitting him.
        this was directly in front of cops – who just stand there…

      2. “Has to be parody. She doesn’t even have a New England, let alone a Boston accent. She sounds like she’s from Indiana.”
        Honestly that vid was so fucking stupid it could in fact be real. Stranger things have happened.
        And her accent doesn’t mean anything – all cities in the states have people from other areas of the country. And Boston accents are mainly heard from people who live just outside the city.

  6. This article makes the false assumption that the police are here to protect us in the first place. The police are just like any other government organization they go after the easy targets to pad their numbers, and the targets that will most advance their careers.

    1. In the US the supreme court has ruled that the police have no duty to protect any citizen. They might from time to time do so, but it is not their job, despite all those to protect and serve signs on police cars.

      1. “In the US the supreme court has ruled that the police have no duty to protect any citizen. They might from time to time do so, but it is not their job, despite all those to protect and serve signs on police cars.”
        Do you having any source citing for that? I wouldn’t doubt it but I would be curious to look it up.

    2. Very true. They hound you till death over traffic violations but turn a blind eye to the barbarians at the gate.

      1. “Very true. They hound you till death over traffic violations but turn a blind eye to the barbarians at the gate.”

    3. “. The police are just like any other government organization they go after the easy targets to pad their numbers, and the targets that will most advance their careers.”
      Add in too the police are willing participants in the destruction of the country.

  7. “No one should expect the police to counter every threat in society, including the specter of terrorist attacks”
    The police are in fact helping the terrorists attack their host nations as unofficially mandated by the politicians. When one thinks of the enemy combatants most think of the sharia apes that are running amock raping, stealing, and vandalizing, and of course collecting welfare. But everytime anyone in England sees a policeman, know that he / she / is your enemy and they are there to protect the migrants, while trying to come with reasons to throw you in jail.
    Again: Law Enforcement = your enemy.

  8. I sincerely hope that the nation built by Alfred the Great, and continued with Longshanks, Marlborough, Wellington, Nelson, Disraeli, Churchill and Thatcher turns around. All hope rests with Boris Johnson and his wing of the Conservative Party.
    Winston Churchill foresaw the situation we have today: he called out Clement Atlee in 1945. He knew that the left-wing policies of Labor would require a Gestapo-like organization to advance their causes. What we have now is the Gestapo of Social Justice.

    1. That’s Ælfred the Great to you, bub. Heh.
      I’m with you absolutely on your sentiment.
      My grandparents were very pro-Churchill and were revolted by what was going on against him immediately after the war.

  9. “Protecting” the people is not the primary job of a police force. The primary function of a police force is to enforce the laws. Criminal laws, conceptually, are supposed to be a deterrent: “preventing” crime by punishing people who break the law. The police force is part of the mechanism to find people who have broken the law and punish them for it.
    Even when police are out on patrol — which they do a lot less of these days (setting up speed traps doesn’t count as patrol) — they are primarily deterring crime by being visible, not “protecting” people.
    Some police forces engage in some level of surveillance and intelligence gathering, but the functions there again are not the “protection” of average people, but amassing evidence of current and ongoing crimes.
    Politicians and government officials are often afforded police protection in the form of bodyguards and police details, but not average citizens. Only very rarely do average citizens receive any such protection, and when they do receive it, it is usually because they have already been the victim of a crime, they have been seriously threatened with immediate bodily harm, and/or the police want something from them (e.g., their testimony in a case, etc.).
    (Note: this is not a knock on cops. Most cops I have known admit that rarely do they actually prevent crime before it happens or truly stand in between a criminal and his intended victim.)

      1. A good friend of mine’s sister is disabled. She can’t walk on her own, can’t raise her arms above her head. She is still able to live on her own, but just barely.
        She is virulently anti-gun. She was railing one day on how “insane” it was that “just anyone off the street” can get a gun “from anywhere” and kill a bunch of people. She kept going on about how guns were this evil scourge that no modern society should ever permit. She mentioned a recent city ordnance that had raised the bar for people where she lived to have guns, and said it was weak and meaningless.
        I turned to her and calmly, rationally walked her through the scenario of someone breaking into her place while she was home alone. There had been a couple rapes and a home invasion in her neighborhood, and I reminded her of that. I went step by step – what would happen, what she would/would not be able to do, how long the cops would take, etc.
        Watching her snarky the-cops-will-protect-me illusion crumble as I explained how the real world and time works to her was almost sad. She had literally never considered the fact that, if someone wanted to break into her home and rape/torture/kill her, there was absolutely nothing that the cops (or anyone else) could do about it.
        She was actually in tears by the end of it… but I was never mean or in her face. I was totally calm and 100% factual the entire time.
        But at the moment, the very moment, that she considered that maybe, just maybe, she might have to think about maybe possibly potentially getting a gun for her own protection, I stood up and laughed in her face.
        That city ordinance she said was weak and meaningless? I reminded her that by one of its terms, through no real direct fault of her own, she wasn’t allow to have a gun.
        To this day, she refuses to be in the same room with me. She also remains virulently anti-gun because her only other option is to face reality — and she sure as hell cannot do that.

      1. The police are typically “crime historians.” They usually show up after the smoke clears, take names & pictures, interview witnesses and write a report. The reason cases where they do show up and thwart a violent crime in progress are high profile is because they are infrequent.

    1. In 1987 my (now ex-) wife shot a serial rapist in our home. It took the police 50 minutes to get there after she called. EMS was there much quicker, but only because we had a neighbor who was an EMT and rushed over when she heard the call go out on her scanner. Unfortunately, she saved the scumbag’s life. So…which would you rather have at time like that, a gun or a phone? I look at my pistol like that old American Express card ad: “Don’t leave home without it!”

    2. True. Even with experience as a LEO, most people don’t believe it when I tell them the police are under no legal obligation to protect you. Women especially.

  10. I befriended Mark Pearson on Facebook a while back. The poor guy has had anxiety issues and shies away from public transportation since that day. I pray he’ll get the justice he’s due.

    1. Tomorrow, instead of triggering article 50 and Brexit, we could have Fuxit, and trigger a bunch of stoopid feminists

  11. The Sheriff Nottingham is a feminazi. Quel Surprise.
    Seriously though policing the boundaries of stupid shit is far more important to the elites than real crime. Real crime is useful for the same reason terror incidents are useful: they are acts which can be used to instil fear and push agendas to control domestic populations etc. Policing the boundaries of speech (stupid shit) is how ideology is maintained and reproduced, which is the real role of the police in today’s world. Violent crime, terrorism above all, isn’t a danger to the state, indeed it serves the state. Speech on the other hand is genuinely dangerous

  12. Why are only central European nations being targeted by immigration? I find it strange that Spain and Portugal have been totally neglected.

  13. Isaiah 5:20 Woe
    unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for
    light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for

  14. Just read yesterday that British police are now sitting on the top of double-decker buses to catch people using their phones while driving, and it’s all about money.

  15. Anyone else having trouble loading returnofkings on chrome? had to use edge last couple of days…

  16. When the day of vengeance comes I will look forward to seeing these donut eating, judas goat, system pig cops butchered on meat hooks along with politicians and the evil jews responsible for these insane, evil era we live in. 14/88!!!!

  17. Britain is a totalitarian craphole, to be honest. They spend more time investigating politically incorrect behaviour than anything else. Legions of muslim rape gangs are actually abetted by police, while schoolgirls who complain about not having classmates who speak english are arrested. Nuke it and have done with it, the people there have failed their ancestors.

  18. This is nothing new in today’s world. Police find it far easier to play the role of coward than actually do any real police work or something that will cost the law enforcement bureaucrats any kind of dollars. It makes the police money by rampantly impinging on the rights and freedoms of normal citizens than it is to catch violent thugs. This, together with the modern day, pussified, mangina simp fits hand in hand with the agenda they purvey. This is not just alone isolated to the UK, but all nations across the globe are somewhat folly to the typical form of inept cowardice of the police forces. Why bother putting their safety at risk (as we taxpayers pay them to do) when they can simply just push us around for a manifold of ludicrous laws which are not even governed by any sense of morality, but rather political correctness rotting the world like a cancer from inside.
    In the end, police are merely thugs which are authorized by government to deploy their power upon nations of unwitting sheep, in order to get them under their control. They are not heroes, they are not life savers, they are absolute scum!

    1. I only hope in the U.S. – police officers and military men will remember their oath and defend the people against the usurpers (globalists).

      1. Unfortunately, while the military and police are controlled by the governments, whom which are in the very hands of the globalists, they have absolutely no power to do so, (even if they want to).

  19. Anarcho-tyranny. A concept first elaborated by the late, great Sam Francis, I believe. Make so many rules that it’s impossible for anyone to follow them all, then selectively enforce them. Anarchy for the privileged classes, tyranny for the others.

  20. The UK is 100% owned and operated by the Jews. Until that issue is addressed…well, nothing will change for the better.

    1. People never ask cui bono? The whole “Muslim panic” stuff hardly benefits Muslims, who are subject to a new wave of Western military recrimination after each “terror attack”, and who see the West turn their countries turned into warzones — but Israel’s position in the Middle East strengthens as a result of this.
      As Netanyahu said, it’s Israel that benefits from this bogus “War on Terror”.

  21. Most of these high-profile “terror attacks” are false flags or hoaxes, anyway. Why would the police prevent them? They’re the ones helping to stage them.

  22. Honorable men, if #1 and #2 don’t boil your blood and set you on the path of actual revolution – we might as well kill our selves now

  23. interestingly, in no less than three circuit or higher court rulings in the US; the courts have made it plain and clear police have NO REQUIREMENT, LEGALLY OR MORALLY to protect citizens from death, injury, or malicious acts. Especially if the life of the officer is jeopardized. If such an act happens, however; they DO have a duty to enforce whatever law was violated by apprehending the culprit and ensuring they go to what some still call ‘justice’ in our courts. But the duty on occurs after the crime is committed.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *