WHAT NEXT FOR BRITISH BRAINWASHING OFFENSIVE?
SINCE PRESCOTT IS BOSS, EVIL PROGRAMME CONTINUES
Friday 3 March 2006 00:16
Since the following analysis was published [see below] and posted
here, John Prescott, the so-called British Deputy Prime Minister, has
disgraced the country, his Party and his high office by the exposure of
his predatory sexual misdemeanours while supposedly performing his
official duties. On 7th May 2006, it was reported that the Metropolitan
Police may be looking into this and into the wanton behaviour of his
former diary secretary. The fate of the brainwashing operation run out
of Prescott's former office, which is the subject of this posting, was
therefore uncertain; but it can be taken for granted that this dangerous
revolutionary operation, the purpose of which is to develop a core
nationwide cadre of brainwashed revolutionary 'implementers', will not
have been affected.
To confuse matters, the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister has, all of
a sudden, metamorphosed into the Department of Communities and Local
Government (ensuring some print contractor yet another avalanche of
taxpayer-funded bonanza orders). Note the use of the word 'Community' in
the new title, which of course connects with the
'Common'/Community/Communist agenda here.
CREATING A NEW POLITICAL CLASS – THE 'GREAT BRAINWASHED’
The following analysis appears in the current issue of GLOBAL ANALYST
[Volume 2, #3]:
The British Fabian Government, which carries the misleading label ‘New
Labour’, is in fact the cover for a ‘gradualist’ revolution – the pace
of which is perpetually accelerating.
Presiding over the actual revolutionary content of this very dangerous
Government is its leading in-house Bolshevik, John Prescott. One of his
top, taxpayer-funded civil servants runs, from Mr Prescott’s own office,
a nationwide neurological linguistic control brainwashing programme.
Many BBC, ITV and other media personnel are graduates of this operation.
The British Deputy Prime Minister is a former ship’s steward and
long-term Bolshevik who, like his ‘ex’-Soviet counterparts, lives in
luxury (in his Hull constituency, in a well-appointed official flat in
Admiralty Arch, Central London, and at Dorneywood, an official UK
Government residence in the countryside). The image that this fellow
projects is one of contrived working-class buffoonery, reinforced by the
occasional violent outburst of uncontrolled violence, as when he punched
a member of the public in the face on-camera. In January, Prescott was
compelled to ‘apologise’ to the House of Commons for having failed to
remit his Council Tax – which his own Office of the Deputy Prime
Minister (OPDM) sets and imposes on the rest of us. A never-ending
catalogue of botches, failures, aborted schemes and other loony fiascos
is his speciality. He has been in place ever since the so-called New
Labour clique led by the deeply compromised Tony Blair – allegedly
financed by funds originally derived from the Trinity Mirror newspaper
group’s old pension fund stolen by the late Mossad operative, Robert
Maxwell – swept to power in a landslide following a carefully
orchestrated operation to highlight ‘sleaze’ (corrupt or sexual
misbehaviour) within the Conservative Party. There were 19 such sleaze
‘exposures’, and the consequence was that ‘New Labour’ took office in
1997 amid expectations that it would remain in power for a generation.
Given the image of buffoonery that this John Prescott projects,
observers have for some time been asking themselves why on earth this
figure has remained in his senior position for so long, unaffected by
Blair’s Cabinet reshuffles and other disturbances which have
destabilised this revolutionary Fabian Government. The answer to this
question has emerged in recent months thanks to diligent and persistent
research by extremely competent analysts who have, as the British often
say, ‘smelled a rat’ – believing John Prescott to be much more important
than his crass image would suggest.
It transpires that the ramshackle Office of the Deputy Prime Minister
employs a certain female revolutionary operative as Head of Personnel
Selection, named Mrs Julia Middleton. But that is just her cover job.
Middleton’s real focus is as so-called Founder and Chief Executive of a
vast networking organisation calling itself ‘Common Purpose’ – a
responsibility that she somehow manages to combine with her official
rôle as a senior civil servant paid by the taxpayer.
You will have noticed two features of this name: the use of the aesopian
Communist/revolutionary word ‘Common’ – which is to be found replicated
many millions of times throughout all European Union Collective
documentation – and the initials CP, which double for Communist Party.
They are also, appropriately, the ‘Conservative’ Party’s initials (see
below).
Characteristic of revolutionary jargon is a deliberate failure ever to
define any terms at all. Accordingly, the adjective ‘Common’ is not
defined, and neither is the noun ‘Purpose’. This is because, if the true
revolutionary ‘purpose’ were to be exposed, the 'Useful Idiots' who have
allowed themselves to be conned into supporting and financing this
revolutionary putsch, would be appalled, and most of them would cancel
their sponsorship.
A partial list of the‘Useful Idiot’ sponsors is given at the end of this
exposure article.
NEUROLOGICAL LINGUISTIC CONTROL OFFENSIVE
An expert in psychological manipulative techniques used by corrupt
intelligence agencies has identified the agenda of this subversive
organisation as neurological linguistic control, which means that it
specialises in mind control and brainwashing. The technique used is akin
to that employed by a parallel, but older, offensive, named Moral
Rearmament (or MRA). What that old, well-funded operation does is to
seek to strip its targets of all loyalties, the established neuro-control
technique, by indoctrinating them into confessing all past ‘sins’ to the
collective. The consequence, of course, is that many victims become
blackmailable, and may therefore be less resistant to the next evil step
– demands for money, which aim to deprive the victim of his or her
independence and to strap them permanently to the organisation. In other
words, the standard Tavistock-originated cult indoctrination techniques
are used.
In the case of ‘Common Purpose’, its huge neurological linguistic
control offensive is directed at sweeping all resident notions from the
victim’s mind and psyche, and replacing them with ‘slides’ , or the
‘politically correct’ notions that the control manipulators seek to
impose. As a component of the brainwashing that takes place at ‘Common
Purpose’s’ fake ‘educational’ sessions, which are held all over Britain,
the following cynical routine is employed in one way or another: first
of all, a predetermined ‘consensus’ line is promulgated before the
group; secondly, notions which conflict with the predetermined
‘consensus’ are dismissively, and perhaps rudely, debunked. In the event
that anyone voices ‘dissenting’ views, they are sharply and insultingly
criticised, à la Cultural Revolution, and made to look foolish in front
of their peers. This is standard practice.
Thirdly, ‘lines’ are unveiled for all present to accept without question
– preconceived ‘slides’ which are always so reasonable that no-one could
dare object to them; and anyone who does, is forthwith labelled
('type-cast as') an ‘extremist’.
The sophisticated revolutionaries concerned maintain a large vocabulary
of prejorative epithets which can be directed at ‘non-conformers’. For
instance, your correspondent attended an event at the International
Monetary Fund/World Bank Annual Meetings held in Prague in 2000, which
was addressed by the former President of Ireland, an unbelievably
unpleasant woman called Mrs Mary Robinson. For some reason, she was
sounding off all about the ‘Roma’ (gypsies) – listing their problems,
how they were ostracised from society, and how society owed them a
better deal. Your correspondent pointed out that experience in Britain
with these people was that no matter what services were provided for
them, they invariably failed to ‘clean up their act’. If a field gate is
left open, they are liable to enter the field and to squat there
indefinitely: so field gates have to be padlocked against that
eventuality.
Mrs Robinson, whose politics seemed so far to the Left that she was ‘off
the chart’, failed to answer the question put to her and resorted
instead to clichéd verbal abuse, saying that the Editor was
‘finger-pointing’, ‘demonising’ and ‘type-casting’.
Let us now step away from ‘Common Purpose’ for a moment, and consider
what has happened to the Conservative Party in Britain in recent weeks.
Just as the Labour Party was taken over in the 1990s by a small,
well-funded, ruthless0