Sometimes, Alex Jones and his guests set out the globalists’ agenda so clearly, it is awesome. Here he is, talking to our own Paul Joseph Watson about the armed troops who burned down homes and killed children in Uganda to evict them in the name of climate change.

This full spectrum analysis includes the topics of mainstream media silence, climate change and humanitarian scams, neo-colonialism under the guise of protecting against climate change, land grabs, and UN and Big Pharma eugenicists working towards population reduction as part of a global regime. Watson writes,

Armed troops acting on behalf of a British carbon trading company backed by the World Bank burned houses to the ground and killed children to evict Ugandans from their homes in the name of seizing land to protect against “global warming,” a shocking illustration of how the climate change con is a barbarian form of neo-colonialism.

The evictions were ordered by New Forests Company, an outfit that seizes land in Africa to grow trees then sells the “carbon credits” on to transnational corporations. The company is backed by the World Bank and HSBC. Its Board of Directors includes HSBC Managing Director Sajjad Sabur, as well as other former Goldman Sachs investment bankers.

The company claims residents of Kicucula left in a “peaceful” and “voluntary” manner, and yet the people tell a story of terror and bloodshed.

Villagers told of how armed “security forces” stormed their village and torched houses, burning an eight-year-child to death as they threatened to murder anyone who resisted while beating others.

“We were in church,” recalled Jean-Marie Tushabe, 26, a father of two. “I heard bullets being shot into the air.”

“Cars were coming with police,” Mr. Tushabe said, sitting among the ruins of his old home. “They headed straight to the houses. They took our plates, cups, mattresses, bed, pillows. Then we saw them getting a matchbox out of their pockets.”

“But in this case, the government and the company said the settlers were illegal and evicted for a good cause: to protect the environment and help fight global warming,” reports the New York Times.

An Oxfam report documents how the British outfit has worked with the Ugandan government to forcibly expel over 20,000 people from their homes using terror and violence as part of a lucrative scramble for arable land that can be used to satisfy the multi-billion dollar carbon trading ponzi scheme, which is worth $1.8 million a year to the company.

“I no longer own any land. It’s impossible to feed my children – they have suffered so much. Some days all they eat is porridge from maize flour. When people can’t eat well their bodies become weak – there have been lots of cases of malaria and diarrhoea. Some days we don’t eat anything at all,” said former farmer Francis Longoli, whose land was stolen by New Forests.

As we have previously documented, the manufactured threat of man-made global warming is being used as a tool of neo-colonialism in the third world, not only through the seizure of land and infrastructure, thereby preventing poor nations from using their resources to develop, but by literally starving poverty-stricken people to death.

Climate change alarmism and implementation of global warming policies is a crime of the highest nature, because it is already having a genocidal impact in countries like Haiti, where the doubling of food prices is resulting in a substantial increase in starvation, poverty and death, with the population being forced to live on mud pies.

Read the rest of Watson’s article here.

I just had a look at Leggy’s blog after writing that first paragraph and saw that he has written about some of the things I was about to write about. My dilemma now is whether to suggest you just read his post, try to write my own without copying bits from his, or forgetting it altogether and sticking on one of my classic comedy DVDs and relaxing.

What to do? What to do?

Actually, some of these latest news stories are crazier than the things that happen in Fawlty Towers, George and Mildred and even Red Dwarf.

The other day, I finished watching all 112 episodes of Tales of the Unexpected. You may be wondering what heinous crime I committed to warrant such a cruel and unusual punishment. A few were excellent and some were woeful and the rest somewhere in between.

But not much is unexpected nowadays, so when the Liverpool Daily Post announces that,

A-Level results went up for the 29th consecutive year

It isn’t unexpected, because it has been obvious for years that it’s a stitch up,

…the number of A-level students getting top marks nearly doubled between 1997 and 2010.

The reasons for this are numerous – A-level papers have got easier, examination boards are more lax, teachers are better at teaching to the test – but few people believe it’s because our children have actually become more intelligent. If you compare the performance of 15-year-old British schoolchildren to their counterparts in other developed countries when it comes to reading, science and maths, they’ve got worse, not better.

Why does the government want to make youngsters believe that they are more intelligent than they are? It is right to encourage children and to praise them, but not to lie to them. Not to give them false hopes that they can go to university and get a degree and become a brilliant whatever it is they want do be, when the reality is that if they aren’t up to it they will end up deep in debt and unable to get a job that earns enough to pay it back. They will have wasted years of their lives when, if the system was run honestly, they could have learned a useful trade instead or been otherwise employed.

My feeling is that this whole charade has been devised to produce a shortage of workers as an excuse to increase migration and also to get as many people as possible into debt to prepare them for a lifetime of servitude to the ’system’ perhaps eventually to try and make them more compliant to being ‘chipped’ at some stage in order to keep getting credit and able to buy the necessities.

Whatever the ulterior motives, sending half of school leavers to further education – after they have already received twelve or thirteen years of education (allegedly) – seems no way to ensure we have a productive economy.

But we know that the economy doesn’t matter to the elite, because another thing they expect us to believe in is the manmade climate change fraud, which is just another way to de-industrialise us while squeezing out yet more money from us in “green” taxes.

So even more old folk will die of the cold in winter with increased electric and gas bills, but like the thousands of teenagers whose lives are blighted unnecessarily by debt, most politicians will turn a blind eye to it all.

And talking of climate change, the climate surrealists are now so desperate to sell their wares to an increasingly savvy public, that they have been coming out with even more hot air than Al Gore in his fantasy ‘documentary’ An Inconvenient Truth.

This was the film that was sent to every secondary school in Britain and which so upset Stewart Dimmock, a school governor from Dover, that he took the Government to court for brainwashing children with it – and won. I bet the BBC hated having to cover that story, because as the government’s propaganda arm, it has to perpetuate all sorts of myths.

One of Gore’s fraudulent claims in the film was the idea that:

for the first time, polar bears had actually drowned “swimming long distances – up to 60 miles – to find the ice”. The judge said: “The only scientific study that either side before me can find is one which indicates that four polar bears have recently been found drowned because of a storm.”

But despite no evidence at all, how many people still believe that polar bears are drowning for lack of ice?

Now we are expected to believe that overweight people are responsible for climate change.

But first prize in the things they expect us to believe category must go to NASA, who are suggesting that aliens might destroy the earth – not because, as Leg-iron suggests:  “Perhaps the scientists are worried that aliens will see fat people from space” – but because our carbon emissions could be considered a risk to their civilisations.

Even though carbon dioxide levels were much higher in Earth’s past and even though any alien civilisation on some far-flung planet would not be affected in the slightest by our use of incandescent filament light bulbs, we are to be afraid of angry monsters from outer space.

Some people believe that governments will announce a fake alien landing in order to panic the public, thus allowing them to bring in martial law on a global scale. I wrote about the possibility of this last year, after another extraterrestrial claim by NASA which was nothing of the sort, but nevertheless, still helps keep the possibility of ‘alien’ life alive in people’s minds.

But to believe there are all sorts of aliens out there is to believe in something else quite unbelievable: The Theory of Evolution. Consider what I wrote at the time:

People need a paradigm shift here. I speak as a Creationist, of course, but I believe there are dangerous misunderstandings which surround evolution. I don’t think “life” can occur as readily as many people have been led to believe.

There is a Law of Biogenesis which states that, “life arises from pre-existing life, not from non-living material”.

To believe contrary to Louis Pasteur’s Law is hardly a new idea, “The ancient Greeks believed that living things could spontaneously come into being from nonliving matter, and that the goddess Gaia could make life arise spontaneously from stones…”

This is especially interesting as we are again living in an age where Gaia worship is widely practised, this time in the form of devout environmentalism.

But I suspect that NASA will keep putting out “alien” stories, especially in times where money is tight, to keep the government funding coming through.

And it is vital to keep up the pretence if a government ever stages an “alien” invasion as a pretext to removing the remaining freedoms even the bin Laden fearmongering couldn’t reach.

And this brings me nicely onto my final topic, the attacks of 9/11 (Osama bin Laden was not considered a suspect by the FBI).

It amazes me how many people can watch the collapse of World Trade Centre Building 7 and think buildings fall this way due to fire. WTC7 was not hit by a plane yet came down on the afternoon of 11th September 2001 like a controlled demolition in near freefall speed onto its own footprint. I know people are in denial when they will not even admit that it looks peculiar. The only time they will ever have seen a building collapse like WTC7 will have been a controlled demolition using carefully pre-planted explosives. But to admit government involvement to themselves would be to acknowledge that the world is a scarier and more unpredictable place than they thought it was; than they want it to be.

But what is really scary are the consequences of not facing the truth. The consequences are exactly as we are seeing actually happening to us: climate change used against us to tax us even further and shut down our industry; a country and its people steeped in debt; unjust laws and restrictions put on us to fight the “War on Terror” – and a global government to oversee all these things.

It is best to face the truth sooner rather than later.

It reminded me that I meant to post this video of Johnny Ball on the BBC’s Daily Politics last week. He has noticed that a GCSE Chemistry book is full of climate change propaganda.

He rightly says that the “lunatic energy policies which have been thrust upon us by politicians… are making every child and every family poorer.”

So, rather than filling children’s heads with doom and gloom, he says:

The future for our kids is brighter than we can yet imagine and that’s the message we should be delivering to every child.

If only we didn’t have politicians with other ideas.

Ed Miliband is "ready to lead"

Ed Miliband made his maiden speech to Conference yesterday as new Labour leader. Not “New” Labour leader, i.e. not new New Labour leader, just new Labour leader.

This is very important, because New Labour is dead. This Party is no more; it has ceased to be, etc…

But Mr Miliband is not a Norwegian Blue pining for the fjords. He is Red Ed pining to see his “new generation” of socialists transform Britain into a Mecca of equality.

Hey, wait. Isn’t this what New Labour was supposed to be about? But instead, the gap between rich and poor widened – and the coffers of the Blairs and Kinnocks grew exponentially.

That’s socialism the world over, though: the leaders promise equality, but make sure they themselves are far more equal than those who voted for them. But still they get voted back in. Voters still believe, “Oh, we’re sorry about the past, we’ll do things better next time because we care so much about equality and peace and reducing crime and improving education and health….”

Tom Harris insists that New Labour was much more than a PR gimmick,

But if, like me and many others, you believe New Labour is an indispensable political philosophy which embraces Labour as the party of aspiration, and not just as the party of the dispossessed, then New Labour – however it’s described, labelled and marketed – is here to stay.

His suggestion that Labour is the party of aspiration inspired some comments. This was mine (which wasn’t approved, even though I was polite and said hello),

Hello Tom,

I’m obviously not the only one almost to have choked as I read, “The party of aspiration.”

Those who genuinely do aspire to do something with their lives aren’t likely to vote Labour (if they have any sense).

So, what are Labour voters aspiring to, I wonder?

Being the fourth generation in their family never to work?

Being able to get a job on the minimum wage and give their mum £30pw housekeeping?

Scoring the winning goal in the World Cup final?

Do you really imagine, in your wildest dreams, that people who have genuine aspiration want to vote for a party which keeps a huge underclass as pets?

You should have set your alarm clock, Tom; it’s gone waking up time!

Red Ed doesn’t agree with Tom either.

The theme of the speech hinged on his repeated declaration of a “new generation” – one which he said would deliver change to the party and the country, with “different attitudes, different ideas, different ways of doing politics”.

He attempted to draw a line under 13 years of Labour government, admitting the party in power had been wrong to claim it had ended boom and bust, to encourage a culture of debt, to fail to regulate the City and to ignore concerns about immigration, and wrong to go to war in Iraq.

So we can now draw a line under the New Labour junta, can we? The million or so dead in Iraq and Afghanistan. The near bankruptcy of our country. The deliberate re-engineering of our society through mass immigration.

No sane person will ever draw a line under this utter treachery. Not before those responsible pay for their crimes instead of being rewarded with vast fortunes for going on speaking tours.

My last-but-one post detailed the ConDems’ equality chief’s vision of the socialist dystopia of forced equality she wishes to inflict on us. I reckon Miliband Jr could have given pretty much the same speech.

Critics have raised concerns about Mr Miliband’s stance on traditional marriage after he pledged last month to redefine marriage and impose it on society.

Mr Miliband says he is “angry” that there is a free speech law that allows people to express their opposition to homosexual conduct.

He obviously views people being allowed to express an opinion as such a danger that he is prepared to link it to extreme violence,

He wants the law repealed because he claims the protection would make it harder to convict murderers.

If we ever have the misfortune of having this man as Prime Minister, he might just ban us saying or writing a lot of things. This is what events are leading up to.

Ed Miliband’s conversion to the environmental religion is also very worrying indeed. My only contact with him was an extremely brief encounter on Twitter last November at the time of the climate change conference in Copenhagen when he was the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change.

Me:

Are you absolutely sure that your facts about ‘climate change’ are correct before promising away billions of pounds?

EM:

yes,at met office today.CO2 concentrations highest for 650,000 years.co2 link to temp. clear, scientific effect

Me:

So wait. It was much warmer in the Middle Ages, with lower CO2. What does this tell us about CO2 and climate change?

EM:

End of conversation. But he doesn’t need to know the answer. He’ll do as he is told. By climate change “scientists” and the EU and UN agencies and fakecharities and transnational corporations and all the usual suspects which have plagued our politics and our country for quite a long time now.

And finally, Ed doesn’t want to be called names anymore, such as Red Ed, Forrest Gump or Wallace. Tough, Ed. A tiny bit of childish fun is all you’ve left us with. Anyway, how else do you expect us to behave after thirteen years of New Labour infantilising us?

Conspiracy theories:

1) The theory: mass immigration is being used to re-engineer society.

Typical response: “Racist scum,” etc.

Now proven to be true.

2) The theory: climate change is not primarily manmade, but is a ruse to impose a world government which will tax and control us.

Typical response: “You climate change deniers will kill millions of people,” etc.

Data now shown to have been falsified for political reasons and that the planet hasn’t been warming for years. A world government is being set up to make laws, collect taxes and implement carbon trading which will impoverish and probably destabilise the West. As planned.

It is claimed that the large amount of land given over to the farming of biofuels has already caused millions to starve.

3) The theory: the BBC is a propaganda machine for liberals and socialists.

Typical response: “Get a life, you sad man. By the way, did you see EastEnders last night?” Etc.

As if it wasn’t obvious enough anyway, we have revelations about Dr Who being used to try and topple Maggie Thatcher. The BBC is admittedly anti-Christian and pro-Muslim. There is also admittedly a disproportionate number of homosexuals in the Corporation, which, of course, is evident in the output.

4) The theory: the 9/11 attacks were an inside job.

Typical response: “You’re an anti-Bush, American-hating scumbag with no respect for the victims’ families,” etc.

While numbers who deny the official story are increasing, many still have to overcome their aversion to facing up to the terrible truth that buildings don’t turn to powder just because they are hit by planes. Building 7 wasn’t hit by a plane, yet also came crashing down into a neat pile of rubble. If it was science fiction you wouldn’t believe it, so why do so many still believe it when it is told in truth? Especially considering the history of false-flag operations carried out by Western governments.

5) The theory: the Theory of Evolution is a 19th Century misunderstanding, which is now clear from modern scientific discoveries.

Typical response: unprintable (based on replies to my posts on Richard Dawkins’ blog, from which I am now banned).

Not widely known as a conspiracy theory due to the alleged wealth of evidence supporting the Theory of Evolution. When supporters realise that evolution has its limits, e.g. that mosquitoes can become resistant to insecticides, but they never ever become anything other than what they have always been: mosquitoes, then we will get somewhere.

Here’s another part of the conspiracy: the Council of Europe want Creationism banned from science classrooms. Not just because they dispute the science, but because they reckon that, “If we are not careful, creationism could become a threat to human rights”.

And of course, nobody is allowed the ‘right’ to have access to all streams of thought and knowledge, only those which our masters graciously allow us access to, like fraudulent global warming claims and other distractions that would make the Nazi propaganda minister, Joseph Goebbels, explode with ecstasy.

I would say this. We should enjoy the freedom to use the internet to discover the truth while we still have the opportunity.

The heir to the throne raised the controversy in a speech in Manchester, where he launched a new initiative, called Start, to provide the public with advice on how to lead more environmentally sustainable lives.

The Prince had chugged through half of England in the Royal Train, which was pulled by a steam locomotive spewing out masses of CO2 into the air.

He continued: “But to those who seek to persuade us that there is no such thing as climate change, in the face of the now overwhelming peer-reviewed scientific evidence, I would ask just one question. Are you prepared to take the risk of being wrong?”

When the alternative is to be impoverished, spied upon and taxed to death while the elite swans around as they always have done, then yes, I am prepared to take the chance that the data didn’t need to be falsified.

But it did.