Bertrand Russell - House of Lords Speech on the Atomic Bomb 1945 (2/2)

[macsm]

Thanks for sharing, pure gold.

[AnonymousWhitePerson]

Properly none of Bertrand Russell's Policies on mass Depopulatoin can be considered seriously orginal; the doctrine was already spelled out in detail as the population policies embedded in the decrees of Roman Emperor, Diocletion.

[AnonymousWhitePerson]

The British ruling stratum and their banking clique want no less than to reduce the world to a picaresque parody or Pre-Renaissance feudalism.

[AnonymousWhitePerson]

In January 2009 almost half of tested samples of commercial High-Fructose Corn Syrup (HFCS) contained considerable Mercury, according to a recent issue of "Environmental Health."

Researchers found detectable levels of Mercury in nine of 20 samples of commercial HFCS.

[AnonymousWhitePerson]

Lord Bertrand Russell was a Eugenicist who advocated drugs, promiscuity, and prepubescent sex.

[empire161]

@AnonymousWhitePerson

Firstly, I certainly don't have any problems with promiscuity, indeed far from it. I think there's a strong case to be made for drug liberalisation - though I don't remember Russell talking about that, so want to know your source. Would like to know your source of his advocacy of prepubescent sex too. As for being a eugenicist, that's very dubious. You'll probably refer to his 'The Scientific Outlook' and 'The Impact of Science on Society', but were warnings, not advocacy.

[possumverde]

@empire161 Concerning the "prepubescent sex" claim, the only thing I can think of remotely along those lines was Russell saying (or publishing I can't remember) something about parents not smacking a baby (or maybe it was a toddler) for "playing" with their "privates". If that is his basis for the claim, then I fear his parents must have smacked him a bit too hard.

As for promiscuity, There's nothing wrong with it as long as it's "practitioners" accept the responsibility for the "consequences".

[jacksawild]

@AnonymousWhitePerson You need medication, unfortunately that wont cure you of being a dick. He was for free love, but spoke about the need for it to be moral. What you are doing is launching unfounded attacks on a man who you are not fit to comment on, due to your brain being about as effective as a syphilitic one-eyed monkey. Which is a very apt analogy for you, I feel. Everybody who reads your clap trap has lost a portion of their will to live and as such, please fuck off the internet. thanks

[yuleness]

@jacksawild

id just say for someone who is a member of the British aristocracy..and a proponent of British philosophy..that the British Empire and what it thinks best for the world is a fraud. This is not a question of international politics from the standpoint of individual sovereign nations, this is international Geo-politics from the standpoint of the British Empire.."vital interests".."firm agreement".."sounds like you watch your back ill watch mine".where's the cooperation on advancement?

[AnonymousWhitePerson]

The corrupt EU may change its constitution at will without Parliamentary restraint. The right of waging offensive war is enshrined, and the death penalty including for disturbances and rebellion is reintroduced.

[empire161]

@AnonymousWhitePerson

The point is, it's not been 'reintroduced' - it's been there for decades! Though, as I said, I don't personally think it should be there, it certainly hasn't be utilised in the past and it definently does NOT demonstrate the NWO 'fascist' conspiracy, you assert, actually exists.

We've strayed very far from your initial assertions, and it's very obvious how you lack credible evidence in proving that the specific abuses you allege, presently exist.

[AnonymousWhitePerson]

@empire161,

The Lisbon Treaty was created by the London-based Financier Cartel as a means to enslave and wrest the Continent of Europe from all sovereignty from the nebulous area of Lisbon Portugal to the nascient borders of Belarus.

[AnonymousWhitePerson]

"Deprivation of Life" is a Euphemism for KILLING.

[empire161]

@AnonymousWhitePerson

If you look at the European Convention on Human Rights, it is listed in black and white dude. It may very well be mentioned in the Lisbon Treaty, but already been in force since 1953, as I've already said.

[empire161]

@AnonymousWhitePerson

It IS present in the ECHR. Search "European convention on human rights" in Google. Look at ANY of the web pages containing it, it says exactly what you told me earlier, right then and there - in the bloody ECHR. Whether the Lisbon Treaty has the capacity for the ECHR to be suspended (though I know not whether that's the case) is irrelevant. It is mentioned in the ECHR, I can't mention that enough times - in that respect, it's not a new phenomenon.

[AnonymousWhitePerson]

You may be killed for "Unlawful" Rioting against the European Union Lisbon Treaty Organisation.

What distinguishes Rioting from Protesting againt the Treaty?

[empire161]

@AnonymousWhitePerson

The 'Statements' you claim as fact are often derived from spurious sources though.

[AnonymousWhitePerson]

@empire161,

The Club of Rome is a spurious source? The Club of Budapest? The Club of Madrid? The World Wisdom Council? The Trilateral Commission? The Council on Foreign Relations?

The Optimum Population Trust? These consitute erroneous sources?

The Lisbon Treaty, if enacted in December 2007 would implement the Death Penalty for rioting against the European Union.

[empire161]

@AnonymousWhitePerson

I don't care if you can list off a number of organisations - I can do exactly the same thing. As I said, I want specific evidence from specific reports, documents etc suggesting that the 'fascist' policies are being implemented at the present time. Concern about world population, as I've suggested numerous times, does not logically suggest that the extreme policies you accused them of, is being implemented. In what specific section(s) of the Lisbon Treaty does it say that?

[AnonymousWhitePerson]

(A) Article 2(2) of the ECHR:

"Deprivation of life (KILLING) shall not be regarded as inflicted in contravention (Violation) of this article (Article on Right to Life) when it results from the use of force which is no more than absolutely necessary:

(a) in defence of any person from unlawful violence;

(b) in order to effect a lawful arrest or to prevent the escape of a person lawfully

detained;

(c) in action lawfully taken for the purpose of quelling a riot or insurrection."

[empire161]

@AnonymousWhitePerson

Thanks for that, the information you gave is very specific - as per my request. However, as you noted yourself, this isn't in the Lisbon Treaty, it's in the European Convention on Human Rights - something effective from 1953! Consequently, based upon that, the claim that "the Death Penalty for rioting" is being introduced is nonsense. Should that section still be in force today? Perhaps not. But to claim it suggests a 'fascist' EU is a complete distortion of the facts.

[AnonymousWhitePerson]

In 1993 International Conference on Population was held in Mexico City, with affiliates in 150 countries worldwide.

The year 2050 is earmarked for drastic population reduction. It is in all of the Think Tanks for Britain and America.

[empire161]

@AnonymousWhitePerson

What aspect(s) of the 1993 "International Conference on Population" should I be concerned about?

Which think tanks have 2050 "earmarked for drastic population reduction"? Not "all of them" (it reminds me of Sarah Palin's pathetic response to what newspapers she reads), give me specific examples of think tanks and documents etc stipulating exactly what you suggest...

[AnonymousWhitePerson]

On such Think Tank is the Optimum Population Trust which advises Prince Charles and Prince Philip Mountbatten, Duke of Edinburgh.

I suggest that you observe the United Nations Rio Earth Summit.

I see that you are judiciously employing the Socratic Method.

[AnonymousWhitePerson]

Perhaps you should consult the Bilderberg Group.

[empire161]

@AnonymousWhitePerson

What aspect(s) of it should I be concerned with? Remember, I want evidence, not your loose speculations about what goes on in 'private' meetings.

[AnonymousWhitePerson]

@empire161,

You only need to read the statements on Population put out by Eugenicsts like Bill Gates. Hilary Clinton recently also apparently attended a session of the Bilderberg Group.

[empire161]

@AnonymousWhitePerson

Yet again - so what? Individuals making such statements about world population does NOT logically suggest they are implementing the so-called 'fascist' policies you accuse them of. I want you to provide me with hardcore evidence that the policies you accuse them of implementing right now, are actually occurring. All I have from you is a paranoid rant from a seemingly deranged individual. Give me some bloody evidence!

[AnonymousWhitePerson]

The UN's Population agenda is perfectly expressed by Maurice Strong's statement of the World Bank that the world's population be reduced to 2 billion and ideally to 500 million. The same sentiment is shared by Ted Turner, founder of CNN who founded the United Nations Foundation in 1990 to promote the views of the fascist UN.

The Club of Rome is also fascist as is the Club of Budapest, Club of Madrid, and the fascist Bilderberg Group.

[empire161]

@AnonymousWhitePerson

Individuals suggesting that, ideally, they'd like the world's population to be certain levels says nothing UNLESS you can prove, utilising evidence, that certain 'horrendous' actions are going on at the present moment. As for calling the UN 'fascist', I'd like to see some evidence that backs up your claim - such a claim shouldn't be bandied about willy-nilly.

[AnonymousWhitePerson]

Founded in 1968, the Club of Rome, a Think Tank for the United Nations self-same describes itself as "A group of World Citizens."

[empire161]

@AnonymousWhitePerson

Personally, I like the concept of a 'World Citizenry', so that's a positive, not a negative for me. I am familiar with the Club of Rome. If there were/are problems with they data they employ, or the proposals they make - fine, the criticisms need to be noted. However, same applies for ANY other organisation or institution around the globe. Just because a certain group has a greater outreach than others, doesn't mean there's some kind of 'conspiracy', as you tend to imply.

[AnonymousWhitePerson]

@empire161,

By being an advocate for "World Citizenry," I assume that you are also a proponent of sterilisation, world socialism, and World Government under the UN. Perhaps you enjoy the Council on Foreign Relations' Puppet, Obama.

Perhaps you should read the Club of Rome's 1993 Publication, "The First Global Revolution where they indicate that this "Global Warming" is a contrived Hoax.

[empire161]

@AnonymousWhitePerson

Evidentally, it doesn't logically flow that by supporting the notion of 'World Citizenry' I support all the things you suggested. Question - IF the document is as 'horrendous' as you suggest, thereby indicting the Club of Rome and the NWO YOU believe controls the entire planet, why should I be able to buy a copy new from Amazon . com?

[AnonymousWhitePerson]

@empire161,

The world's central banks, including the Bank of Canada, Central Bank of Brazil, and United States "Federal" Reserve, Bank for International Settlements in Basil Switzerland, European Central Bank are all private and are attached to the World Bank.  The World Bank is an agency of the United Nations.

[empire161]

@AnonymousWhitePerson

So what if the World Bank is an agency of the UN?

[empire161]

@AnonymousWhitePerson

You've missed the point dude. You simply IMPLY that the World Bank is a negative institution - it may or may not be, I don't know. However, I want evidence that it is a negative institution, not being guilty by your simple suggestion...

[empire161]

@AnonymousWhitePerson

If you want to criticise the current system of economics around the world, that's fine, but this is not the place to do so.

As for Maurice Strong, who you used as a source previously, he used to be involved in the World Bank, but no longer is. Nonetheless, as I've said, I want hardcore evidence that your claims regarding right NOW are correct. You've failed to provide adequate evidence that the UN is 'fascist', let alone is the 'terrible' NWO you assert.

[AnonymousWhitePerson]

The British Fabian Society was promulgated by the Astor Family and propagandist for the Royal Institute for International Affairs, HG Wells.

[AnonymousWhitePerson]

The United Nations is the Most Evil Institution on the planet.

[empire161]

@AnonymousWhitePerson

Because...?

[AnonymousWhitePerson]

The UN was not set up to be an arbiter of world problems but rather to be a World Government with a World Bank, International Monetary Fund, World Health Organization, International Court of Justice, World Army, and numerous other agencies and departments to govern health, nutrition, education, immigration, agriculture, science, technology, environment, banking, military, trade, economics, finance, commerce, communication, utilities, transportation, military, police, government, and population.

[empire161]

@AnonymousWhitePerson

IF we accept that was the case (which it may or may not be) on what grounds should we be opposed to it? Obviously there are reasons for and against having such a system - but you say that the UN is straight out "evil" for having such institutions in place. I'd like to know why....

[AnonymousWhitePerson]

The UN is perhaps the most undemocratic institution on the planet, and it is meant be at least the first prototype for a World Government, with a Parliament for the Americas, one for Europe, one for Africa, and one for the Pacific." The UN has a department on Population to regulate how many people can live and die.

A long-term goal of the Eugenicists in the UN is to reduce the world's population to 2 billion through mass death. The year 2050 is earmarked for drastic population reduction.

[empire161]

@AnonymousWhitePerson

'Undemocratic'? Yes, it's not an elected body. The UN is made up of member states, who send delegates to the locations of its various Secretariats around the world, electing individuals to various positions. Should we be able to elect it? Up for consideration. As I've alluded to earlier, IF the UN is a prototype for a World Government we should analyse it rationally, weighing up both sides of the argument. As regarding your eugenicists point, I'd like to see some evidence.

[JarradIRONEAGLE]

@AnonymousWhitePerson Are they feeding too many poor third world people? Providing too much medicine to the 3rd world? Preventing too much conflict? Or putting too many disease control measures in place to prevent outbreaks?

Wow, evil.

[AnonymousWhitePerson]

He was a Monster.

[empire161]

@AnonymousWhitePerson

Because...?

[Ormaaj]

@GreatGrumbledook You have no idea who Bertrand Russell is, do you? Probably one of the most influential and well-known philosophers of the 20th century. War and nuclear weapons certainly aren't about "excitement" if that's what you're implying. Actually I have no idea what you're implying. Everyone should be a "tough grizzled old soldier"? What the hell does that have to do with this speech?

[GreatGrumbledook]

@Ormaaj: By all the Gods Romans bow before, he is an ass as in the world: I will verify as much in his pipe: He has no more directions in the true disciplines of the wars, look you, of the Roman disciplines, than a puppy-dog!