 |
First Black President Grovels To Virulently Racist Royal Family
Prince Philip asks Obama “Can you tell foreign leaders apart?”
Steve Watson
Infowars.net
Thursday, April 2, 2009
The sight of any U.S. president literally bowing to British royalty is enough for many Americans to become outraged. However, the fact that the latest to do so is America’s first black president made yesterday’s exchange between Obama and the Queen of England even more troublesome.
Prior to meeting the Queen and her notoriously racist husband, Prince Philip, Obama announced that he “loves” her and that “in the imagination of people throughout America” the queen stands for “decency” and “civility”.
How repugnantly ironic that the first black president of the so called “free world” should refer to the most entrenched prejudiced and elitist institution in Europe as an icon of “civility”!
How disgustingly deplorable that the president should call “decent” a bloodline that has for centuries declared itself as God’s appointed rulers over half of the planet, killing, torturing and maiming anyone who crosses it in order to hold on to that mantle.
Reports also circulated regarding Obama practicing bowing and brushing up on courtly etiquette ahead of the meeting.
Traditional royal protocol dictates that men do a neck bow and women do a slight curtsy — though a handshake is considered acceptable as long as the queen offers her hand first, Politco reported.
When the President met the Queen in a room used to stage audiences with foreign dignitaries, Obama bowed his head and quietly said to her: “Thank you so much for having us” before turning to the Duke, bowing once more and adding: “It’s a wonderful honour.”
Michelle Obama curtsied to the Queen, however, later on she was treasonously caught inappropriately putting her hands on the glorious Monarch. The London Telegraph even issued a report on how the move was “a departure from what is considered appropriate protocol when meeting the Queen.”
Perhaps the most revealing part of the meeting, however, came from the mouth of Prince Philip.
Just as I had predicted 30 minutes previously on the Alex Jones radio show, Philip could not contain his virulent xenophobia, even in front of the cameras and the press.
In the small talk, the Queen and the Prince asked the President and his wife about their grueling schedule since arriving late on Tuesday evening.
“The time lag,” said the Queen
“You’re just trying to stay awake!” said Philip.
Then the President told the Royals: “I had breakfast with the Prime Minister, I had meetings with the Chinese, the Russians, David Cameron…
“And I’m proud to say I did not nod off in one of the meetings.”
A guffawing Prince Philip then blurted out: “Can you tell the difference between them?”
Apparently Barack Obama replied that he had no trouble telling them apart.
Then Philip, with a wave of his hand, directed the Obamas to turn around for the camera, to which the president nervously replied “of course”.
The Obamas and the Queen managed an astonishing set of uncomfortable false smiles, while Philip didn’t even bother attempting it.
The foursome then joined other world leaders in sipping champagne and devouring canapés, including mini Cornish pasties, smoked quails’ eggs, foie gras and rolls of duck filled with melon.
Watch video of the cringe inducing exchange:
Prince Philip has made so many racist remarks in public, that they literally fill an entire book.
In 1984 he asked a Kenyan woman “You are a woman, aren’t you?”.
In 1986 he told British students in China ”If you stay here much longer, you will go home with slitty eyes.”
In 1998, during a tour of Papua New Guinea, he told another British student, ”You managed not to get eaten then?”
While on a tour of a company near Edinburgh, Scotland, he saw a poorly wired fuse box. “It looks as though it was put in by an Indian,” he remarked.
During a small town visit in Scotland, in a brief conversation with a driving instructor, he asked, “How do you keep the natives off the booze long enough to get them through the (road) test?”
In a 2002 visit to Australia, Prince Philip asked an Aborigine, “Still throwing spears?”
Also, he once told a group of deaf children standing near a Jamaican steel drum musician, “Deaf? If you are near there, no wonder you are deaf.”
The list goes on and on. While the media often laugh the remarks off as “gaffes”, they take on a more serious nature when Philip’s background and the organizations he is involved with are more carefully examined.
It is well documented that Prince Philip’s sister, Sophia, was married to Christopher of Hesse-Cassel, an SS colonel who named his eldest son Karl Adolf in Hitler’s honour. Indeed, all four of Philip’s sisters married high-ranking Nazis. The prospect of the former Nazis and Nazi sympathisers attending his 1947 wedding to the future Queen of England meant he was allowed to invite only two guests.
Two years ago, more revelations of Philip’s Nazi links emerged in a book that featured never before published photographs of Philip aged 16 at the 1937 funeral of his elder sister Cecile, flanked by relatives in SS and Brownshirt uniforms.
Another picture shows his youngest sister, Sophia, sitting opposite Hitler at the wedding of Hermann and Emmy Goering. Philip was forced to concede that his family found Hitler’s attempts to restore Germany’s power and prestige ‘attractive’ and admitted they had ‘inhibitions about the Jews’.
Philip also helped start the World Wildlife Fund with former Nazi SS Officer Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands, who is closely affiliated with the founders of the Bilderberg international power group.
In the past, Philip has also attended the ultra secretive ritualistic meeting of elites at Bohemian Grove, where he “stole the show” with an “amusing but salty speech” in 1962, according to the Grove’s own literature (pictured below).
Philip was also trained in the Hilter Youth. His belief in Nazi ideology is clear when one looks at what he has said on the subject of overpopulation.
In the foreword to his 1986 book If I Were an Animal, Prince Philip wrote, “In the event that I am reincarnated, I would like to return as a deadly virus, in order to contribute something to solve overpopulation.”
Borrowing the idea from American scientists who pioneered the field in the 1930’s, the Nazis advanced the pseudo-science of eugenics and incorporated it into Adolf Hitler’s dream of the Aryan super-race. Bearing in mind Philip’s Nazi connections, his views on the subject of overpopulation are unsurprising, but shocking nonetheless.
Just last year he reiterated these views, announcing that there are too many people in the world, and attacking large families in a television interview, despite the fact that Prince Philip himself has four children and eight grandchildren.
His son, Charles, the next King of England, has continued such ideology as he tours the world in private jets lecturing about the impact of climate change and how too many people are killing the planet.
(ARTICLE CONTINUES BELOW)
The royals’ zeal to thin the population of undesirables has little to do with so-called “green credentials,” as is fatuously argued by the corporate media.
As Alex Jones documents in his seminal documentary End Game, this mindset is endemic amongst the elite.
Skip to the bottom of this article for a vast selection of similar quotations from Philip, all advocating culling the “surplus” human population.
Racism within the Royal family is not restricted to Prince Philip, however.
In early 2005 Philip’s grandson, Prince Harry, was forced to publicly apologise for donning full Nazi regalia including a badge of the German Wehrmacht and a swastika armband.
Pictures of Harry wearing the uniform were taken at a friend’s birthday party in Wiltshire, which had the fancy dress theme “colonial and native”.
Last year Harry was once again forced to issue an apology for referring to an Asian army colleague as “our little Paki friend” and joking with another that he “looks like a raghead”, an offensive term for an Arab.
In the same week Harry’s father and Philip’s son, Prince Charles, caused another race row after it emerged that he had been calling an Asian friend by the nickname “Sooty”.
In 2004 a rather disgusting story emerged in the U.S. media regarding Princess Michael of Kent, who is the wife of Queen Elizabeth’s first cousin. Princess Michael’s father, Baron Gunther von Reibnitz, was also exposed in the 1980s as a former Nazi party member and SS officer.
The Princess reportedly turned to a table of black New Yorkers in a busy restaurant and chided them for being noisy, adding “You need to go back to the colonies.”
When asked to explain her comments by one of the diners the Princess reportedly said “I didn’t say go back to the colonies, I said, Remember the colonies,” adding that “In the days of the colonies there were rules that were very good.”
Just think about it. A German-born British aristocrat — whose father was in the Nazi SS — in the United States telling African Americans who have been here for centuries to “remember the colonies”? The LA Times noted.
The late Queen mother was also said to be virulently racist by close aids, last year Edward Stourton, the presenter of the BBC’s flagship radio program Today, described her as “a ghastly old bigot”.
According to others, the Queen mother referred to black people as “nig-nogs” or “blackamoors”, opposed all forms of immigration, and thought black Africans incapable of running their own countries. She backed white minority rule in Rhodesia and lamented that former apartheid leader P.W. Botha got bad press.
The Queen mother also criticised Lord Mountbatten, viceroy of India, “for giving away the empire” and his wife because “her mother was half-Jewish”.
Despite all of this the media consistently referred to her the as “nation’s favourite granny”.
But it gets worse…
Before the war began the Queen Mother was a supporter of making concessions to Hitler and the Nazis, a feeling shared by a large number of British aristocrats who admired the way Hitler was dealing with the Communists.
For some 50 years royal documents were held in vaults at Windsor Castle that detailed the abdicated king Edward VIII’s relations with Hitler and the Nazis. They included captured German documents describing the Windsors’ meeting with Hitler in 1937 and plans to restore Edward, the Duke of Windsor to the throne if the Nazis won the war. Some of these documents still remain hidden from the public.
While many have described the Edward VIII and his wife as known sympathisers of the Nazis and their policies, relatives of Wallis Simpson, the American woman whom Edward had an affair with, and the reason for his abdication, have suggested that in fact Edward was excommunicated by the rest of the royal family because he wasn’t friendly enough with the Nazis.
Throughout the Twenties and Thirties, George V and George VI were steadfastly opposed to conflict with their ancestral fatherland.
The modern royal family was founded in 1840 when Queen Victoria married Albert of Saxe-Coburg, a Germany duchy, creating The House of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha. Such was the ill-feeling towards all things German during the First World War that in 1917 Victoria’s grandson King George V – an honorary Field Marshal in the German army – thought it prudent to renounce the German name and titles and adopt that of Windsor, the name of a small town in the home counties of England.
Today many people in Britain suggest that all these facts are no long relevant because the royal family has very little power. This is a huge myth. The Queen is the head of state and as such she can simply replace the British government at any time she chooses, should she wish to do so. The royal family still owns vast swathes of land throughout Britain and the rest of the world, and the Queen still presides as head of state in Canada and Australia.
******
Prince Philip, In His Own Words: We Need To ‘Cull’ The Surplus Population
Here is a re-cap of some of the things “HIS ROYAL VIRUS”, Prince Philip has said in public concerning “culling the population”
Reported by Deutsche Press Agentur (DPA), August, 1988.
In the event that I am reincarnated, I would like to return as a deadly virus, in order to contribute something to solve overpopulation.
Prince Philip, in his Foreward to If I Were an Animal; United Kingdom, Robin Clark Ltd., 1986.
I just wonder what it would be like to be reincarnated in an animal whose species had been so reduced in numbers than it was in danger of extinction. What would be its feelings toward the human species whose population explosion had denied it somewhere to exist…. I must confess that I am tempted to ask for reincarnation as a particularly deadly virus.
Press conference at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C. on the occasion of the “Caring for Creation” conference of the North American Conference on Religion and Ecology, May 18, 1990.
It is now apparent that the ecological pragmatism of the so-called pagan religions, such as that of the American Indians, the Polynesians, and the Australian Aborigines, was a great deal more realistic in terms of conservation ethics than the more intellectual monotheistic philosophies of the revealed religions.
Address on Receiving Honorary Degree from the University of Western Ontario, Canada, July 1, 1983.
For example, the World Health Organization Project, designed to eradicate malaria from Sri Lanka in the postwar years, achieved its purpose. But the problem today is that Sri Lanka must feed three times as many mouths, find three times as many jobs, provide three times the housing, energy, schools, hospitals and land for settlement in order to maintain the same standards. Little wonder the natural environment and wildlife in Sri Lanka has suffered. The fact [is] … that the best-intentioned aid programs are at least partially responsible for the problems.
Preface to Down to Earth by HRH Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, 1988, p.|8.
I don’t claim to have any special interest in natural history, but as a boy I was made aware of the annual fluctuations in the number of game animals and the need to adjust the “cull” to the size of the surplus population.
Lecture to the European Council of International Schools. Montreaux, Switzerland, Nov. 14, 1986.
The great difficulty about “life” is that we humans are part of it, and it is therefore almost impossible to study objectively…. It therefore tends to be anthropocentric and gives scant attention to the welfare of all the other life-forms which share this planet with us.
…|When the Bible says that man shall have “dominion” over God’s creation, the choice is between understanding dominion as in “having power over,” or dominion as “having responsibility for.”
“Conflict Between Instinct and Reason”
Fawley Foundation Lecture. Southampton University, Nov. 24, 1967.
The conflict between instinct and reason has reached a critical stage in man’s affairs, largely because the explosion of facts has revealed the instincts for what they are and at the same time it has undermined traditional philosophies and ideologies. The explosion of facts has effectively altered mankind’s physical and intellectual environment and when any environment changes, the process of natural selection is brutal and merciless. “Adapt or die” is as true today as it was in the beginning.
Introduction to “Exploitation of the Natural System” section of Down to Earth by HRH Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, 1988.
It took about three and a half billion years for life on earth to reach the state of complexity and diversity that our ancestors knew as recently as 200 years ago. It has only taken industrial and scientific man those 200 years to put at risk the whole of the world’s natural system. It has been estimated that by the year 2000, some 300,000 species of plants and animals will have become extinct, and that the natural economy, upon which all life depends, will have been seriously disrupted.
The paradox is that this will have been achieved with the best possible intentions. The human population must be properly fed, human life must be preserved and human existence must be made safer and more comfortable. All these things are obviously highly desirable, but if their achievement means putting the survival of future generations at risk, then there is a pressing obligation on present generations to apply some measure of self-restraint.
Address to Edinburgh University Union, Nov. 24 1969.
We talk about over- and underdeveloped countries; I think a more exact division might be between underdeveloped and overpopulated. The more people there are, the more industry and more waste and the more sewage there is, and therefore the more pollution.
The Fairfield Osborne Lecture, New York, Oct. 1 1980.
If the world pollution situation is not critical at the moment, it is as certain as anything can be that the situation will become increasingly intolerable within a very short time. The situation can be controlled, and even reversed; but it demands cooperation on a scale and intensity beyond anything achieved so far.
I realize that there are vital causes to be fought for, and I sympathize with people who work up a passionate concern about the all too many examples of inhumanity, injustice, and unfairness; but behind all this hangs a deadly cloud. Still largely unnoticed and unrecognized, the process of destroying our natural environment is gathering speed and momentum. If we fail to cope with the challenge, the other problems will pale into insignificance.
Introduction to “The Population Factor” section of Down to Earth by HRH Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, 1988.
What has been described as the “balance of nature” is simply nature’s system of self-limitation. Fertility and breeding success create the surpluses after allowing for the replacement of the losses. Predation, climatic variation, disease, starvation–and in the case of the inappropriately named Homo sapiens, wars and terrorism–are the principal means by which population numbers are kept under some sort of control.
Viewed dispassionately, it must be obvious that the world’s human population has grown to such a size that it is threatening its own habitat; and it has already succeeded in causing the extinction of large numbers of wild plant and animal species. Some have simply been killed off. Others have quietly disappeared, as their habitats have been taken over or disturbed by human activities.
Humans are the Greatest Threat to Survival
Interview with HRH Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, in People Dec. 21, 1981 titled “Vanishing Breeds Worry Prince Philip, But Not as Much as Overpopulation.”
Q: What do you consider the leading threat to the environment?
A: Human population growth is probably the single most serious long-term threat to survival. We’re in for a major disaster if it isn’t curbed–not just for the natural world, but for the human world. The more people there are, the more resources they’ll consume, the more pollution they’ll create, the more fighting they will do. We have no option. If it isn’t controlled voluntarily, it will be controlled involuntarily by an increase in disease, starvation and war.
Address to the Joint Meeting of the All-Party Group on Population and Development and the All-Party Conservation Committee in London, March 11, 1987.
I do believe … that human population pressure–the sheer number of people on this planet–is the single most important cause of the degradation of the natural environment, of the progressive extinction of wild species of plants and animals, and of the destabilization of the world’s climatic and atmospheric systems.
The simple fact is that the human population of the world is consuming natural renewable resources faster than it can regenerate, and the process of exploitation is causing even further damage. If this is already happening with a population of 4 billion, I ask you to imagine what things will be like when the population reaches six and then 10 billion…. All this has been made possible by the industrial revolution and the scientific explosion and it is spread around the world by the new economic religion of development.
Address at the Salford University Degree Ceremony, July 16, 1973.
There may be disagreements about the time scale, but in principle there can be little doubt that the population cannot go on increasing indefinitely. Resources presently being used will not last for ever and pollution in its broadest sense, unless severely checked, is bound to increase with population and industrial activity.
Address to All-Party Conservation Committee in London, Feb. 18, 1981.
I suspect that the single most important gift of progress to conservation has been the development of human contraception techniques.
The survival of the “most important”
Interview with HRH Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, in People magazine, Dec. 21, 1981 titled “Vanishing Breeds Worry Prince Philip, But Not as Much as Overpopulation.
Q: Is birth control part of the solution?
A: Yes, but you can’t legislate these problems away. You’ve got to get people to understand the need for it: the more important people, the ones who have responsibilities have got to do it because they’re at the receiving end. They’ve got to accept the measures.
The Chancellor’s Lecture, Salford University, June 4, 1982.
As long ago as 1798, Malthus explained what happens when the factors limiting the increase in any population are removed. One of the factors noticed by Darwin was that all species are capable of producing vastly greater populations than can be sustained by existing resources; populations did not increase at the rate at which they are capable was the basis for his theory of Evolution by Natural Selection.
The relevance to natural selection of this capacity for overproduction is that as each individual is slightly different to all the others it is probable that under natural conditions those individuals which happen to be best adapted to the prevailing circumstances have a better chance of survival. Well, so what? Well, take a look at the figures for the human population of this world. One hundred fifty years ago it stood at about 1,000 million or in common parlance today, 1 billion. It then took about a 100 years to double to 2 billion. It took 30 years to add the third billion and 15 years to reach today’s total of 4.4 billion. With a present world average rate of growth of 1.8%, the total population by the year 2000 will have increased to an estimated 6 billion and in that and in subsequent years 100 million people will be added to the world population each year. In fact it could be as much as 16 billion by 2045. As a consequence the demand on resources of land alone will mean a third less farm land available and the destruction of half of the present area of productive tropical forest. Bearing in mind the constant reduction of non-renewable resources, there is a strong possibility of growing scarcity and reduction of standards. More people consume more resources. It is as simple as that; and transferring resources and standards from the richer to the poorer countries can only have a marginal effect in the face of this massive increase in the world population.
Speech at the Margaret Pyke Memorial Trust Dinner in London, Dec. 14 1983.
So long as they [birth control methods] … remained taboo subjects the chances of making any impression on the human population explosion were that much more remote.
In the introduction to the IUCN Red Data Books which list all animals and plants under threat of extinction, it says that virtually everywhere the major threat to a wild species is loss of habitat to a rapidly increasing human population requiring more space in order to build villages and cities and grow more food. But starvation and poverty cannot be eradicated solely by increased food and resources at the expense of what remains of the natural world. Any increase in the provision of food and resources must be accompanied by a drastic reduction in the rate of increase in the human population.
Address on Receiving Honorary Degree from the University of Western Ontario, Canada, July 1, 1983.
The industrial revolution sparked the scientific revolution and brought in its wake better public hygiene, better medical care and yet more efficient agriculture. The consequence was a population explosion which still continues today.
The sad fact is that, instead of the same number of people being very much better off, more than twice as many people are just as badly off as they were before. Unfortunately all this well-intentioned development has resulted in an ecological disaster of immense proportions.
The Chancellor’s Lecture, Salford University, June 4, 1982.
The object of the WWF is to “conserve” the system as a whole; not to prevent the killing of individual animals. Those who are concerned about their conservation of nature accept that all species are prey to some other species. They accept that most species produce a surplus that is capable of being culled without in any way threatening the survival of the species as a whole.
A Question of Balance by HRH Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, Michael Russel (Publishing) Ltd., 1982.
It is curious how many philosophers from Plato to Keynes’ time have believed in and advocated the control of society by “philosopher kings.” According to Plato, “its kings must be those who have shown the greatest ability in philosophy,” but–realistically–he added, “and the greatest aptitude for war.” Such people may exist in the imagination and occasionally someone with the necessary qualities may briefly dominate the stage of history, but it is a naive appreciation of human nature to imagine that such processed paragons can be invested with the necessary powers and not be tempted to take advantage of their situation.
Prison
Planet.tv Members Can Watch
Fall Of The Republic
Right Now Online -
Don't Miss Out! Get
Your Subscription Today!
CANCER CONSPIRACY? Are
"they" suppressing the cure? Will YOU
be the next victim? Learn
the Secret Truth! - READ FULL STORY
-
- Social bookmarks
- Email this article
-
- Print this page
57 Responses to “First Black President Grovels To Virulently Racist Royal Family”
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | |||||||
| By N2H | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
April 2nd, 2009 at 2:21 pm
AMEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEN!!!!!!!!!!!!
michael F
Bentonville, Arkansas
April 2nd, 2009 at 2:26 pm
PEOPLE THE 1ST EVER PRESIDENT JUST BOWED DOWN TO A FUCKEN COCKSUCKING WHORE, THE IST EVER BLACK PRESIDENT JUST BOWED DOWN TO A FUCKEN COCKSUCKING RASIST WHORE THAT ENSLAVED BLACKS AND NOT ONLY THAT, BUT IT SEEMS THAT THIS BACK STABBING FUCKEN PRESIDENT IS WORKING FOR THE “WORLD” AND NOT THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. CAN YOU FUCKEN SHEEPLE UNDERSTAND THERE’S NO RIGHT/ LEFT, REPUBLICAN/ DEMOCRAT ????? HE’S NOT WORKING FOR US STUPID, HE’S WORKING FOR THE GLOBALISTS, IF THAT WORD IS TOO BIG FOR YOU, IT MEANS HE’S WORKING FOR THE REST OF THE WORLD NOT FOR US !!!!!!!!!!!!!
scott Reply:
April 2nd, 2009 at 4:51 pm
No he’s not working for the rest of the world, he’s working as a puppet to try and deceive the people of the world for a Global Elite, which of course included the Queen, who is very near the capstone of the pyramid I would say when it comes to those in real power. The ones right at the top operate from outside this 3 dimensional frequency range, but that is obviously difficult to understand and requires lots of research.
April 2nd, 2009 at 2:31 pm
This a totally unsubstantiated rumor.
But word is that Prince Philip was rude enough to ask B. Obama to sing Java Jive by the Ink Spots. He even tried to help get Obama started by doing a lame tap dance, and singing the first stanza:
I love coffee, I love tea
I love the java jive and it loves me
Coffee and tea and the jivin’ and me
A cup, a cup, a cup, a cup, a cup!
Of course Obama replied that it was all a blur to him.
April 2nd, 2009 at 2:36 pm
Oh really, Obama is not doing what others have done before while meeting the Queen….lllmmmaaaoooo………..oh, but he is. No ohter American President has ever bowed down to the Cunt of England, let’s NOT forget how our Country came to be, you stupid fucken dumb bitch !!!!!! Do you know why we celebrate the 4th of July. You’re a fucken MORON !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
April 2nd, 2009 at 3:38 pm
Great article Steve, one of the best ones i have read on this site. Thank you for exposing the Royal elite trash for the racists and eugenicists they truly are.
Take care
April 2nd, 2009 at 3:39 pm
I really detest these inbred royal scum, if i had my way, they would be rounded up and gassed! These are ill educated pieces of shit! These people see themselves as superior to everyone else and they behave like benevolent Nazis bit like Von Ribbentraup! These arseholes should be deported back to Germany…… I FUCKING HATE THEM AAAAAGGHHHHHHHH!
April 2nd, 2009 at 3:40 pm
The British royal family have a long history of criminality. For example, they made massive fortunes getting Chinese hooked on opium.
You think it’s fine for the President to visit pleasantly with criminals?
They may be very rich criminals that the press fawn over. But they’re criminals all the same.
These people and their family have exploited billions and you think the author of the article is mean-spirited?
Don’t fight the system:
Replace it
http://socialviability.com/
April 2nd, 2009 at 4:10 pm
Obama is the President of the United States. Of course he’s going to bow to the Queen! This is a retarded article.
THIRD PARTY Reply:
April 9th, 2009 at 10:54 am
YOU MUST BE RETARDED.TO BOW IN FRONT OF WHORE QUEEN OR BOWING IN FRONT OF A KING IS TREASON.PUNISHABLE BY DEATH..
April 2nd, 2009 at 4:26 pm
Obama is just paying tribute to yet another person who has a lot of influence over him behind close doors.
April 2nd, 2009 at 6:05 pm
Calling Obama black is an insult to his mother! LOL! Actually most of his “black” heritage is from the Mid-east. He Pa lived in Kenya but family roots came from the Mid-east.
disagree guy Reply:
April 3rd, 2009 at 3:51 am
And Bush’s came from Nazi germany. Do you have a point somewhere, or are you just spouting racist crap?
THIRD PARTY Reply:
April 9th, 2009 at 10:54 am
TRUTH HURTS HEY.
April 2nd, 2009 at 6:17 pm
Quote “It is now apparent that the ecological pragmatism of the so-called pagan religions, such as that of the American Indians, the Polynesians, and the Australian Aborigines, was a great deal more realistic in terms of conservation ethics than the more intellectual monotheistic philosophies of the revealed religions”
He’s absolutely right there though. That’s a bold and insightful statement. Who could argue that the birth of our main religions served only to distance us from our true nature and mentally and spiritually enslave us.
I rather respect a figurehead with radical views, is there no truth in what he says? If not then why is society filled with mindless sheeple the likes of which are so often mentioned on websites like these?
Also what about Charles and his outspoken opposition to GM foods? This isn’t consistent with suggestions that they are connected to the NWO. Having said that I’d be interseted if anyone posted information to the contrary.
I’d like to point out- before I’m subject to the customary knee jerk reaction of being a supporter, that I’m no royalist. I think they’re out-dated and pointless. But one thing’s for sure, they don’t talk like politicians, at least, maybe because they can afford to be candid. This article is weak, and does nothing except raise the spectre of race paranoia. We’re all a little bit racist, but with the majority it’s purely humour. Then there are all the hypocrits who go and spoil it for everyone else by imposing a blanket ban on anything which could be construed as racist, right down to the use of the term “coloured” as a substitute for black.
Don’t be led off the scent by pieces like this folks, I really don’t see much substance to this. Stick to important stuff PP. Anyone else smell a hint of disinfo?
disagree guy Reply:
April 3rd, 2009 at 3:56 am
A hint? If you dried this stuff out you could fertilise the lawn with it. The Watsons’ exploits in disinformation for intelligence agencies is well known. That and the fact that this -entire- article is based on a factual fallacy – Obama did NOT “bow down”, at all. He was polite and courteous, but no bowing took place. In fact, Michelle Obama even BROKE royal protocol, by putting her arm around the Queen’s back.
And the religious comments are just LAUGHABLE, given that Alex Jones shills for right wing christians all the time. This entire operation is a front for the religious right, and disturbingly more recently, the church of scientology, it seems. I’m apalled at how many people moronically goose-step right behind Alex Jones’ hate speech and never question it. Clearly the man can never make a mistake – he’s never ever corrected himself. He bears all the hallmarks of a future despot – like the people he supposedly despises. Maybe it’s true you eventually become that which you hate the most. When you hear AJ supporters talking about “exterminating” Jones’ enemies, it sounds no different to the supposed rhetoric of the New World Order that he and his flock are “fighting against”.
There’s no room for moderation or rational thought here Mr Zero. What are you doing here?
jimmy Reply:
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:20 pm
Sounds interesting, can you give any proof on your claims about the Watsons, and it being a front for the religious right and Scientology?
Certainly I see Jones express a lot of views that fit the religious right, but he is himself Christian, right wing on economics and Libertarian on social issues from what i’ve seen. Saying it’s ‘a front’ though implies something else, I think you should supply some evidence.
I’ve not seen anything to really link Jones to Scientology, I have seen that claim on some other websites, but they didn’t give any solid proof, just that he’d had a guest on and sold some books by a man who was a member of Scientology, i would assume that was to do with vaccinations, their opposition to those is really the only thing I see similar.
You are making some quite big claims, you should really provide some evidence with them.
THIRD PARTY Reply:
April 9th, 2009 at 10:57 am
YOU MUST BE STUPID OR RETARDED OR BLIND.THE ONLY TIME ONE WOULD BEND OVER IS TO GIVE HEAD,SO HE’S A TRAITOR OR A COCK SUCKER.
April 2nd, 2009 at 7:22 pm
It is not a good idea to be critical of the Queen — she is the Sovereign of Canada Australia and New Zealand as well as the UK
THIRD PARTY Reply:
April 9th, 2009 at 10:57 am
SHE’S A CUNT FROM EVIL
April 2nd, 2009 at 7:35 pm
What do you think of Obama meeting the Royal Family in London?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bTIklFsMjjU
April 2nd, 2009 at 7:40 pm
Royalty is so outdated. A hundred years ago it was filled with awe and mistique, you only saw the queen at special occations like parades. Now with television you see royalty all the time and you realize just how ordinary they really are.
When is the queen mum going to ditch that stupid black hand bag. She looks like a jewish grandmother at the subway station in New York. I understand the black handbag is actually skin from negro slaves from South Africa. I don’t think Queeny will be dancing the Tango with Barack at the ball. She will probably ask OBama to serve the punch.
Scott Reply:
April 3rd, 2009 at 5:05 am
When you have the right to remove a leader from power by means of the army, then you can hardly be called ‘ordinary’. The royal family’s power is like a dormant volcano – the power is always there, just waiting under the surface.
Beavis Reply:
April 3rd, 2009 at 9:40 am
The Queen Mum is DEAD.
A lot of people in the UK would like to see the Queen take over the running of the Country from Gormless Brown and his band of thieves.
She couldn’t be any worse than that stupid prick.
April 2nd, 2009 at 8:45 pm
Give the poor limy a break. You would want mankind killed off too if you ever had to look at queen elizabeths twat.
April 2nd, 2009 at 8:56 pm
“decency” and “civility”. by the Crown…… wow Obama mustve failed history, or just never have bothered with it.
One needs to look only to how Britain waged wars of attrition against innocent people in Scotland and Ireland. Or maybe the fact that the sun never set on the “British Empire”
According to the Crown, our founding fathers were nothing more than “Terrorists” hmmm does this sound familiar?
British citizens are just like US citizens, frustrated and unable to control the people who rule over them.
We have one puppet embracing another.
April 2nd, 2009 at 8:57 pm
At least Prince Philip isn’t a lying hypocrite like Obama!
April 2nd, 2009 at 9:17 pm
I used to enjoy this site but lately they are deleting my posts for no real good reason. I used to find the posts that put this site and Alex down humorous or they made me mad but not any more I’m beginning to think there is something to what they are saying. It’s really sad but I have lost my respect for this site.
(Editor’s Note: SPAMMING your dissatisfaction on almost every thread here with a cut and paste diatribe, is against the rules here… please read… http://forum.prisonplanet.com/.....pic=2911.0 ) ~JTCoyoté
Scott Reply:
April 3rd, 2009 at 5:12 am
Yes but in a room full of people and one is continuously shouting the same opinion and cancelling out the other people that person should have the manners to listen to other people and shut up for a while.
April 2nd, 2009 at 11:20 pm
Yeah, wel,l this article is right actually.
“Could you tell the difference?”
Very good Philip. Derf.
Not many in the MSM picked up on that.
It’s actually quite important in a weird way.
Dumb-ass crackers gotta go.
April 3rd, 2009 at 1:37 am
Perhaps Mr Obama was just be respectful to an elderly lady as head of state of a close allie, who has herself quietly served her country without political leaning for over 60 years?
Perhaps, just perhaps, history, polictics and race don’t come into it?
BTW Queen Elizabeth is Queen of Great Britain and Nothern Ireland and head of state for many other commonwealth countries who still choose to keep her as head of state, not ‘Queen of England’ as suggested in this article. Who needs the history and geography lesson?
Scott Reply:
April 3rd, 2009 at 5:16 am
The Queen’s power is above that of puppet politics. Of course she won’t have political bias, she ultimately controls which ever party gets in because she has the right to remove them if they don’t toe the line. But they always do toe the line, that’s why Labour and Conservatives are identical in all major policies. She isn’t going to remove a party if they are doing as she wishes is she?
jason Reply:
April 6th, 2009 at 11:13 pm
Thats exactly what she did to the Prime Minister of Australia in 1975….she had the Governor-General sack the government because he clandestinly wanted to buy out the forieng mining companies for the Australian people. But guess who own the freehold on the ground under foot?…..Her Royal Highness……what a bunck of bastards this lot are!
April 3rd, 2009 at 2:54 am
Well Pete Jones…it appears you have been bamboozled by the mainstream media. That’s where you get your information from, correct?
April 3rd, 2009 at 3:15 am
Oh come on… talk about false and misleading interpretation, Now I have no love for those old crocks and would glady see them all rot, he was obviously refering to all the different meetings and the content of the meetings to which Obama apropriately replied for a bit of light hearted small talk that they where all a blur at this stage.
You guys go to far sometimes and really discredit yourselves.
April 3rd, 2009 at 3:51 am
Steve is a muckraker, and a well known MI6 Cointelpro asset. This article is garbage. He did not literally “bow down” to her, in fact 99% of all other reputable journalism sources are remarking about the fact that he did NOT bow down.
Enjoy your kool-aid, sheep.
So the entire article is, like all of the Watson brothers’ crap – misinformation. That’s what cointelpro do though, after all.
THIRD PARTY Reply:
April 9th, 2009 at 11:03 am
A BOW ANY LOWER HE WOULD BE EATING HER NASTY COOCH.HE ALMOST GAVE THE KING OF SAUSI HEAD.
April 3rd, 2009 at 6:26 am
Remember the Boer war? Concentration camp is an English word.
Remember Dresden? Churchill tried to blame the Americans for it.
April 3rd, 2009 at 7:05 am
the picture alone makes me downright nauseous..
sickening.. royal scum pukes
April 3rd, 2009 at 7:48 am
Just a thought i have had for many a year now,did america ever really have true independance From Great Britain after all the lies and deceit we have uncovered or suspected
lately,just makes me wonder.
April 3rd, 2009 at 9:00 am
Who cares, they all smell-they all reek of stink. Why do they look like they stink so much?
April 3rd, 2009 at 9:07 am
While it probably was wise to keep normal relations – even with this criminal cadre – this article is excellent for summarizing the background of some of the worst of these elitest scum out there.
I don’t totally blame them – perhaps if they were raised in good working class homes they would have some value – but now they are just parasites that need to be removed from the herd.
The sad thing is – we all know – that Obama is a major kiss a$$ to all this Gloabalist Scum!
Man of the people my butt!
April 3rd, 2009 at 9:10 am
How come they all look like they stink so much? PU!
April 3rd, 2009 at 9:25 am
the stool groom busy busy busy with 4 royal[pain in the] asses in the house
April 3rd, 2009 at 9:57 am
Just proves even more that ‘Obaaaaama’ is a Illuminati suck -up!
Where in the book of Reptillian edicate does it say one needs to be civil?
April 3rd, 2009 at 10:40 am
Heh heh! Seriously though…these people are downright disgusting. They’re filthy inwardly and outwardly. They look like they stink because they’re the walking corpses. They are useless as far as I’m concerned as they are a parasite on humanity-O bammer included-destroying all that is good only because it is good for them. It’s no wonder they’re all ugly too. It matches their nastiness. The elite are a sickness-a cancer on societies.
April 3rd, 2009 at 11:15 am
El-lizard-birth and her piece of sh++ husband with Barry Soetoro. What a farce. I’m sick to death of all of them.
April 3rd, 2009 at 11:16 am
I can’t beleive Prince Philip wastes his time with these non entities.I hear they are planting a watermelon patch and building a chicken house out in back of the white house.
April 3rd, 2009 at 11:20 am
If you had any backbone all you Kiwi’s, Aussies and Canadians you would remove the Queen as your Head of State instead of bowing to her like the good little servile sychophants that you are.
April 3rd, 2009 at 12:29 pm
I agree with you, Tony, but sheep tend to worship the very system that keeps them down. I hated the monarchy before I was “awake”. I have come to the conclusion that some of the stupidest people climb up the ladder because they are ruthless. These people are “title worshipers” , therefore they blindly worship those that have a title without ever questioning substance.
PJ “alive and well in nanny state Canada”
Too many ninnies not enough individuals.
April 3rd, 2009 at 1:53 pm
Nasty article and even nastier comments.
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:24 pm
Ha, that’s quite some compilation of their ‘off-color’ remarks in this article, I guess probably quite a lot of them are racist really.
April 3rd, 2009 at 5:43 pm
Peope outside the UK often misundertand the monarchy’s position in our society. They confuse the symbolic deference, shown to the institution, with power. The institution has remained intact because it keeps our politicians’ feet on the ground. Prime ministers and governments get on with the business of managing the nation while the powerless monarchy attracts the ‘glory’ and sense of national identity. This means our prime minister does not have to mix the roles of Head of State (Which requires a degree of deference) with politician. We see our prime minister as ‘one of us’ – open to rigorous scrutiny and outspoken criticism. Only the monarch remains above the fray – but has no real power.
Don’t forget the following:
The English monarchy has had little real power for the last 300 years.
England was a republic a hundred years before the United States became one.
The English rounded up Charles the 1st and executed him – and since then a strong monarchy was never tolerated by the English
At the time of the ‘Glorious Revolution’ the English got rid of Charles II and invited a foreigner (William of Orange ) to bcome a kind of ‘Chairman of the Board’ Monarch – the object being to separate THE POWER (the parliament) from THE GLORY (the monarch).
Even at the time of the American Revolution it was parliament that had the upper hand and which angered the American colonies. The (German) King of England was pretty much an onlooker.
Oddly England has had only one English monarch in the last 1000 years, the other have been French (Normans and Plantaganets), Welsh (the Tudors), Scottish (the Stuarts), Dutch (William) German (the Hanoverians, Saxe Coburgs and Windsors)
So PLEASE don’t associate the monarchy with the nation. We have been keeping a largely foreign monarchy in a gilded cage for the sake of a stable society. We like our governments to keep their feet on the ground, while the powerless monarchy attract the national pride.
So when people respect the monarch, they are only showing respect to her as a symbol of the nation -not because she has any power. Another reason the monarchy has survived is that it has adapted to circumstances – as it it did when it met the wonderful Obamas.
April 4th, 2009 at 2:57 pm
At least we Americans got our freedom from this vampire royalty 233 years ago. Why haven’t the Brithish people?? Some of my ancestors lived here before that war and I am part English to boot. I used to have a better opinion about these rulers until I educated myself and especially after Princess Dianna was killed. Queen Elizabeth II is an opposite of the great Tudor Queen Elizabeth I. Many of the Winsors were (are?) Nazi sympathizers. They secrety bow to the Vatican’s Pope as do all Western leaders. Please get informed!
April 5th, 2009 at 9:08 pm
Prince Charles was in Brazil last month to put more pressure on the voting for the demarcation of the indigenous “reserve” Raposa Serra do Sol. The WWF has been working a lot around here “helping” the native indigenous people.
The problem is that this area is the richest area in Brazil, and on the planet, in gold, diamonds, bauxite and uranium (the raw material of the nuclear bomb). And “they” decided that the reserve area should be on the borders of Brazil. Why is that? Can’t you imagine their strategy here? They are stealing our territory, our land, our forest, our sovereignty! They have this WWF branch, the “Survival International” that keeps brainwashing people into believing in this BS that Brazilians have been mistreating the forest and the Indians, so that they can invade our territory, and nobody will say anything. I tried to post many texts on their site showing their mistake, proving that they weren’t telling the truth, but they never posted any of my comments. They are really convincing everybody that the Brazilian people are evil with the forest and with the Indians. Well, except for people like this amazingly intelligent woman, who mentions Julian Huxley, the English botanic who founded the WWF, and was also one of the founders of eugenics, and their ideals of human “enhancement” and “purification”. I believe all they want is dominate the world, get the world’s resources, exterminate who they want, who they find “innapropriate” to be alive (which they will eventually do through their wars against the “evil” ones), they will fight overpopulation, and in the end they’ll have fun hunting animals in their private natural parks and resources around the world. Did you know that Brazilians can’t enter these parks they created here? With the help of the UN, some laws were created in order to give Indians “freedom” to have their own land, apart from Brazil. This freedom is actually a scheme to make the process of robbing our resources an easier one. They turned that land into a no man’s land. I’m outraged!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ryHSj7RTOuw
This site talks about the 1001 Club, and about the “reserves” in some African countries. The pattern is the same -> parks and reserves strategically located on the borders of the countries:
http://www.isgp.eu/organisations/1001_Club.htm
BTW, this situation in Brazil is very similar to the lame excuses Bush gave in order to invade Iraq and rob their oil. Who complained against it in the USA? I haven’t seen anybody complaining about it. I hope you also have corageous honest people like the woman in the Youtube video above, and do something, go against this imperialistic moves of both countries, otherwise, you don’t have the right to say anything about the British people, because you’re doing evil things the same. When you don’t say anything against something wrong, it means that you agree with it.
PS: All the Brazilians love president Obama, and hope he’ll be able to lead a very fair presidency.
April 7th, 2009 at 9:07 am
RACISM! RACISM! SQUAWK! SQUAWK!
RACISM! SQUAWK !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Prince Philip is worth 100 of you educationally degenerate junk DNA jiggaboos.
He has an excellent sense of humour thanks to not being a mealy-mouthed hypocrite. You know nothing about anything.
If you wanna really know something he risked his life for five years on Royal Navy battleships in all theatres being hunted by U-Boots fighting the people who would have had your race annihilated if people like him had not defeated them.
So go swivel on your Dad’s dick and stay away from my country you cheap little turd.
April 8th, 2009 at 11:09 pm
I had a brief read of this article. And I can see that the author only done brief research (if any at all!!) Prince Bernhard of The Netherlands was in no way involved with the Nazi occupation and remarks that he was a Nazi SS officer is a tragedy in it’s own right. For the record Prince Bernhard was heavily involved in the dutch resistance and the Royal Air Force.