Tag Archives: gay agenda

Apparently Hollywood actresses are male

I had heard of the claim that Michelle Obama is a man, in fact I wrote about it back in 2014, but I hadn’t heard that there are claims floating around the internet that countless female celebrities are actually transgender men. I saw a video by a Youtuber named Simona Rich claiming that several famous actresses are male, and I find her video convincing, although I’m still not entirely convinced. On top of that it seems there are many other Youtube videos made about similar subjects.

To me this suggests two possible outcomes: either there is some truth to these claims, or it’s the latest psy-op perpetrated by who knows which agency. It does sort of remind me of how the flat earth thing popped onto Youtube a few years ago. There are plenty of ardent flat earth believers out there of questionable origins and intentions. I don’t think the notion of flat earth research itself is a psy-op though, since a lot what we’ve been told of the make-up and shape of our world is conjecture at best, and sometimes all-out lies. I find the alleged evidence suggesting that the earth is curved to be lacking, but I’ve yet to seen conclusive proof of any flat earth model either.

 

Transgender Celebrities

Anyway, let’s get back to this trannygate. In the video Simona Rich shows the facial and bodily features of several famous women like Angelina Jolie, Barbara Bush, Laura Bush, Julianne Moore, Sandra Bullock and many more. She points out some masculine features in them such as male hips and arms. Later on she also points out similarities between the appearance of certain celebrities who are not related, and even shows some of the famous pictures of people from decades ago that resemble celebrities of today. Rich suggests that cloning might be involved, or that these people might actually be fallen angels, nephilim, since they are supposedly genderless.

Now assuming that there is some truth to the whole hypothesis of these people not being truly female I see a few different possibilities. These people could be nephilim, and they are immortal or at least live for a very long time, but the celebrities seem to age, so perhaps they have to renew their skin every now and then just like serpents do. The person, or spirit, inside does not die, but the husk is discarded or regrown somehow. Another possibility is that this is part of a very elaborate Satanic psy-op where these men have been groomed to be women from a very early age and subjected to sex change surgeries in order to make normal men lust after these fake women, and gradually brainwash them into developing homosexual desires. Maybe the gay agenda is a bigger conspiracy than we ever could imagine?

Another video on the same topic I saw is by Cae sar. The video points out that Justin Biber’s ring finger is shorter than his index finger. Men usually have a longer ring finger, whereas women are reversed. This then would suggest that Justin Biber is female. More interesting is the fact that Justin Biber and Miley Cyrus look almost identical although I don’t think they’re related, and one is male while the other is female. I’ve wondered about this before that maybe they are clones, but I just couldn’t figure out why they would bother.

If some of these people actually are clones, maybe they’re not really male or female at all. Perhaps they are neuter by nature, and the genetic engineers that grow them add features to them to make them seem more male or more female. The video by Cae sar said something like estrogen makes the index finger grow longer than the ring finger. So maybe Justin Biber had an excess amount of estrogen go into him while he was still in the cloning vat, although the designer chose to make him male. Their skills clearly aren’t perfect. Perhaps the same goes for the other female celebrities that have male features. The basic model or template the genetic engineers have might have male hips, which is why all of their final products have male hips, but they are technically female. If they’re human at all.

 

Naturally all of this is simply theorizing. I don’t know if they’re clones or transgender or anything like that.

 

Is it a psy-op?

These claims that our vapid Hollywood celebrities are transgender might simply be a psy-op, a distraction. Maybe they are physically normal people and all of this controversy over their gender, or them being clones, is simply nonsense. Then again maybe there is some truth to it. For the sake of the argument let’s say that Michelle Obama is male. Certain people might have multiplied this idea to apply to pretty much every female celebrity to make the whole claim sound ridiculous. Instead of inquiring into Michelle Obama’s background, people are just jumping into conclusions that every female celebrity is male.

The globalist elites are certainly heavily pushing transgenderism and the gay agenda onto us. Bruce Jenner transitioning into female and being celebrated in the media is proof of this. Perhaps the claim that female celebrities are actually transgender is meant to make people who oppose transgenderism in general seem crazy. The media could point at somebody who thinks Bruce Jenner is nuts for trying to change his sex, and say the trans-skeptic is the crazy one. Look how they all believe that Hollywood actresses are actually men.

 

Conclusion

I’m not convinced that the female celebrities are actually transgender, but I do think there is something to the argument. I like the cloning angle. These people could be some sort of automatons, biological robots, or vehicles for non-corporeal spirits. I know it sounds like science fiction, but the faces of Miley Cyrus and Justin Biber keep haunting me. Besides, Hollywood and the globalist establishment is already avash with mind control and the occult. Adding a few clones to the mix wouldn’t make it sound any more crazy.

Yet, whatever the truth about the nature of these people is, it’s very improbably we’ll see any solid proof any time soon. I don’t think we’ll see Alex Jones break into a secret New World Order cloning facility. Or if this is all crazy talk, and the celebrities are just normal people, I don’t think we’ll see proof of that either.

 

Links:

My Strangest Discovery After Flat Earth: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nuaYhTzUNow

There are no real women of the flat earth: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2WcRP13_xm4

Is Michelle Obama a Man?: https://concordiaabchao.wordpress.com/2014/12/14/is-michelle-obama-a-man/

 

Advertisements

Gay Mafia and Freemasons involved in the Ulvila Murder Case of Finland?

December 1st, 2006, social psychologist, Jukka S. Lahti, was murdered in his home in the town of Ulvila in Finland. The identity of the killer is still unknown. In 2009 the authorities began to suspect Lahti’s wife, Anneli Auer, of killing him. Auer was taken to court and spent some time in prison, but in the end she was acquitted by the supreme court in 2015.

Naturally, there has been great controversy over this murder in the Finnish media over the years. Yet I had been left out on the whole affair as I was in Japan when the murder occurred (providing me with a convenient alibi). The details of the case had been fuzzy to me until I decided to take a deeper look a few months ago. Here’s some interesting information I’ve found out so far.

 

Incompetent Police Investigation

The media has reported how the police had screwed up the preliminary investigation in several ways. A few examples of this are that the police did not do a technical or forensic examination of the whole house where the crime occurred. They only examined a few rooms properly.  The police did not protect the blood traces properly and some of them were destroyed or contaminated. The police allowed Anneli Auer to enter the house and take a few things out of it while the house was isolated as a crime scene. There many other details to be found in the media.

While it is possible that the police were simply incompetent and not used to handling crimes of this magnitude, Ulvila, and the “big” city next to it are fairly small places and the police who live there are probably more used to seeing murder cases like this on the TV instead of in their job. However, this sort of convenient incompetence, especially when in great amount, like in this case makes the think the authorities are doing it on purpose to cover something up. Sort of like Rumsfeld saying after 9/11 that they were simply unprepared for such an attack.

 

Freemason Involvement

Anneli Auer’s lawyer, Juha Manner, is a Freemason in the Franciscus-lodge in the town of Rauma. One of the former prosecutors, Jarmo Valkama, was a Freemason in the Satakunta-lodge in Pori. He had acted a prosecutor in the case for a long time, but he stepped down in 2014. In February 2016, he had died of a disease that had advanced quickly.

While it is possible that it is merely co-incidental that both of these men were Freemasons, yet it seems a lot like the classic case of a conflict where Freemasons play both sides. The attorney defending Auer was a Mason as was the prosecutor accusing her of the murder. The death of prosecutor Valkama sounds suspicious as well, but maybe it was a natural death?

 

Gay Connection

The victim, Jukka S. Lahti, had been friends with a couple of (prominent?) homosexuals, and one of whom had disappeared and died a day after the murder of Lahti. Pekka Puputti had been in Club Presidentti in Helsinki in early December 2006, Lahti was killed on December 1st. Puputti was found dead in the sea in Helsinki March 2007. According to MV Lehti Puputti disappeared the day after Lahti was killed. Iltalehti wrote that he disappeared on the night between 1st and 2nd. There are suggestions that Puputti might have killed Lahti.

Both Lahti and Puputti had allegedly been doing their doctorate in the town of Kuopio and had known each other. Iltalehti wrote in January 2007, before his body was discovered, that Puputti was a friend of Lehti and was related to the investigation in the Ulvila murder although he wasn’t the main suspect.  Along with Lehti and Puputti doing his doctorate was a gay activist, Olli Stålström. Stålström had written his dissertation on the topic of “Ending the labeling of homosexuality as a disease” in 1997. Stålström thanks Jukka S. Lahti in the dissertation for his help. According to MV Lehti Pekka Puputti also wrote his dissertation on homosexuality, but it was rejected.

While I suppose there is a possibility that Pekka Puputti came straight to Ulvila from Helsinki, it takes about 3 hours to drive between them, killed Lahti and then either committed suicide or was killed by someone else, I don’t believe it. I do think there is a connection between the deaths of Lahti and Puputti, but I don’t know what it is.

 

Conclusion

There’s a lot more to this murder case, of course, but these are the most intriguing details I’ve found out so far; Freemasons and homosexuals. Small Ulvila is starting to sound like metropolitan city with problems of the big bad world. I don’t know who killed Jukka S. Lahti or why, but to me it seems likely there are important people involved in this affair, directly or indirectly. They’re covering something up.

I am not convinced that Anneli Auer, the wife, is innocent of the whole thing either, but I certainly don’t think she is the sole culprit. If I were a judge in her case I’d have to give a “not guilty” verdict as I haven’t seen proof that she did it, yet I don’t trust her.

 

 

Links:

(All in Finnish)

Ulvilan surma: https://fi.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ulvilan_surma

5 asiaa: Nämä virheet poliisi teki Ulvilan surman esitutkinnassa: http://www.iltasanomat.fi/kotimaa/art-2000000881937.html

15 mokaa – Näin poliisi tyri Ulvila-tutkinnan: http://www.iltasanomat.fi/kotimaa/art-2000000502992.html

Vapaamuurareita: http://murha.info/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=17538&start=90

Franciscus-loosi: http://kaikki.info/vapaamuurarit/loosi_023.html

Satakunta-loosi: http://kaikki.info/vapaamuurarit/loosi_006.html

SK: Ulvilan surman syyttäjä Jarmo Valkama kuollut: http://yle.fi/uutiset/3-8690520

Pikkujouluista kadonnut löytyi kuolleena: http://www.iltasanomat.fi/kotimaa/art-2000000239722.html

Tiesitkö että Pekka Puputti, Jukka S. Lahden ystävä kuoli peräkkäisenä päivänä hämärästi!!: http://mvlehti.net/2015/02/26/tiesitko-etta-pekka-puputti-jukka-s-lahden-ystava-kuoli-paivaa-ennen-jukkaa-hamarasti/

Tunnettu homoaktivisti Olli Stålström tunsi sekä Jukka S.Lahden: http://www.vauva.fi/keskustelu/3831836/ketju/tunnettu_homoaktivisti_olli_stolstrom_tunsi_seka_jukka_s_lahden

HOMOSEKSUAALISUUDEN SAIRAUSLEIMAN
LOPPU: http://www.finnqueer.net/pdf/Homoseksuaalisuuden.pdf

“Häntä ei löydetä hengissä”: http://www.iltalehti.fi/uutiset/200701135586504_uu.shtml

Did the Pulse Nightclub shooting actually happen?

Yesterday a shooting allegedly happened where an Islamic extremist ISIS-supporter, Omar Mateen, killed 50 people in a gay nightclub in Orlando, Florida. This might have been a genuine event, a false flag or a hoax, much like Sandy Hook. I’m not making any definite judgement yet, however some of the eyewitnesses who’ve come out on media sound dubious at best, and are more likely to be “crisis actors”.

Let’s get the facts straight first. We haven’t seen any concrete evidence yet that a mass shooting occurred, or that anyone died at the club. I’m not saying they didn’t, and usually the media wouldn’t show pictures of a shot-up venue with bodies and blood anyway, but the fact is we don’t know the media is telling the truth. It behooves us being skeptical.

 

Hansen Interview

The first witness video I saw is an interview with Christopher Hansen. Apparently he was interviewed by FOX 35, but the video is up on The Telegraph’s website.

Hansen does not come off as someone who just experienced life-threatening shock. I don’t see or hear fear in him. It’s more like he’s been through a rowdy rock concert. Hansen describes how he had been splattered with someone’s blood, and initially he wasn’t sure if it was him blood or another person’s. He motions toward him left arm as if to show that is where the blood was splattered, yet we don’t see it. They don’t see blood, he does not look dirty, just a bit sweaty.

Then Hansen describes the person he “was with” got shot in the back. I presume this means the other person was his friend or acquaintance, yet Hansen describes it calmly and unconcerned that the person might have died. He even says he used his bandanna to tie up a bullethole in his friend’s back. Yet his clothes don’t look bloody at all. He even claimed his hands were covered in blood, but I guess Hansen went home, had a nice shower and a change of clothes before he was interviewed by the media.

At the end Hansen says “this can’t be real” and compares his alleged experience to a scary movie. He also says that “when you’re actually a part of an event, it’s not something you want to be a part of”, yet he looks very excited about it. Like he was part of an exercise that went live or something.

The same video also records the interview with Mina Justice, a mother of a hostage. She is completely non-chalant and emotionless when describing the situation, that the hostage is in the bathroom and going to die. Although, she’s talking about the “dispatch” so maybe she’s actually a 911 worker or something, and the media confused her with being a mother of a hostage. Yet if she was a 911 worker why would they be interviewing her out there near the scene of the crime? It’s just odd.

 

Bulls guy interview

Another interview of an alleged witness is with an anonymous man with a Chicago Bulls cap and an ORMC T-shirt. ORMC probably refers to Orlando Regional Medical Center. The same guy is in two interviews by ABC Action News.

The first, short interview of the Bulls guy starts off with him saying “this is actually real life”. This is in contrast with Hansen’s comment that “this cannot be real”. Both men are explicitly commenting on the reality of the incident. I think it’s like a psy-op to make you lose your sense of reality, that when the media says something is real, it’s real, if the media says it’s not, then it’s not.

In the longer interview he describes how he heard the gunfire and how the shooter changed the clip a couple of times, yet he didn’t see the shooter. I don’t think Hansen saw the shooter either.

The Bulls guy is a better actor than Hansen, but I don’t believe his story either.

 

Carlos Rosario interview

MSNBC interviewed Carlos Rosario, another alleged witness. His face is not shown, which makes it more difficult to see whether he is being genuine or not, but I don’t think he sounds terrified. Rosario also says he didn’t see the shooter. Interestingly he says he’s been a medical assistant for two years. The Bulls guy also seems have some sort of medical training, since he’s wearing the ORMC-shirt.

 

Shawn Royster interview

Shawn Royster was interviewed by CBSN. His description sounds more credible than the others, but his face is not shown either. Apparently he didn’t see the shooter either.

The same video shows footage of police and civilians carrying seemingly injured people, yet there is no blood.

There are probably other witness testimonies out there, but this is far enough. I am not saying the event was necessarily fake or a false flag, but if it wasn’t, it’d be the first. Moreover most of the witnesses sound like Disingenuous Victims, like bad actors. Omar Mateen, the alleged shooter, had been known by the FBI for a few years now. This is commonplace among terror-suspects and false flags, since the FBI manufactures most of them.

 

What’s the agenda?

Assuming that the shooting was a false flag or other type of manufactured event, what would the agenda be? I’ve seen some comments on the internet that if it was a false flag, the suspect would have been a White Trump-supporter, not a Muslim. This is based on a huge assumption that you know what the initial agenda of the globalist establishment is. It is not as black and white as most people prefer to think.

One agenda it could be used to push is the war on Syria or other Middle-Eastern countries. Bernie Sanders had tweeted the following: “From what is now known, this was a terrorist act by an ISIS sympathizer. That despicable and barbaric organization must be destroyed.” If and when Hillary becomes president, I’d be surprised if she didn’t follow Bernie’s advice.

Another agenda is the martyring on homosexuals. The venue of the incident was a gay club, and most of the alleged victims were probably gay. It has been pointed out before that the establishment pushes it’s psy-ops more heavily during the summer, possibly because children are on holiday and pay more attention to these events. Especially the gay agenda is pushed during the summer, just as last year the whole world celebrated the gay marriage laws, now they grieve the victims of the Pulse club. Gays will be seen saintly by the mere virtue of being gay.

Gun control is another classic agenda. The media, of course, cannot blame radical Islam for the shooting, since that would be “racist”, so they blame guns. Most of the witnesses emphasized the scary “pop pop” sound the gun supposedly made. They want liberals to be even more afraid of guns.

The shooting incident will also increase support for Trump, who already wanted to ban Muslims from entering the US. The main stream media hates Trump, that is true, but he is not anti-establishment. He is controlled opposition. Trump’s been on WWE. He knows how the game is played. Trump is going to give a good show and garner a lot of support, but the game is fixed and Hillary Clinton is going to win. Ultimately, I think, the goal is to cause a civil war in the States. Hillary Clinton is an actual criminal, and anyone who has any sense knows this. Unfortunately there are plenty of people in the US and around the world who are completely senseless. The people with some common sense, but still aren’t really paying attention will support Trump. Yet when the victory is wrested from his hands by hook and/or crook, a lot of people will feel cheated. This will radicalize them, and lead to American society become even more polarized.

 

Links:

Christopher Hansen interview: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/12/we-thought-it-was-part-of-the-music-how-the-pulse-nightclub-mass/

Bulls guy short interview: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3aHEKlNNr9w

Bulls guy long interview: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=US2rym39j1c

Carlos Rosario interview: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zhxq9mfBSJ4

Shawn Royster interview: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gvFT9Nr4Qa8

Alt-Right just seems getting gayer; i.e. Common Filth did nothing wrong

Greg Johnson, a prominent figure in the alt-right, wrote on his website, Counter-Currents, that “[t]he Alternative Right is subject to occasional gay panics”. This is supposedly unjustified, and the prominence of homosexuality in the alt-right should just be ignored.

Johnson seems to think the reason behind these “gay panics” is either old testament-style biblical views or the leftist idea of homophobia. He writes: “Generally, this slur originates from the Left, where homosexuality is supposed to be a good thing. But gay panics presuppose ‘homophobia,’ one of the Left’s sins.” I’m not quite sure what he means by this. It sounds like he is trying to steer attention away by hinting you act like a leftist if you’re concerned about homosexuality.

Then Johnson goes on the cite a fairly recent “gay panic” when Matt Parrott and Matt Heimbach were disinvited from Richard Spencer’s NPI conference for anti-gay views. However, Johnson claims this reason for banning them from the conference is not true, and the two Matts are motivated by “narcissistic rage”. Greg Johnson is either blatantly dishonest or ignorant. At least the reason for barring Heimbach from the conference was his anti-gay views. Richard Spencer has admitted as much.

Spencer wrote in his Radix Journal that the SPLC found the conference LGBT friendly. Then he quotes the SPLC site saying Heimbach was “‘booted’ from the NPI conference for his anti-gay views.” Although these aren’t Spencer’s words, he did not contradict them, nor say that the SPLC was making it up. Later on he even states:

“Our conferences will include people who hold many different views on religious, social, sexual, historical, and political matters. We do not exclude anyone for, say, being a Buddhist, Pagan, Catholic, or atheist, or for being passionate about gay issues or thinking that they are not important. We hope that such questions can be discussed respectfully at our conferences.

NPI will, however, exclude those who show reckless disregard with the media, or those who’ve made morally indefensible public statements. Such people make our movement look bad. We choose not to grant them a platform.  It’s as simple as that.”

Apparently having “anti-gay views” in public is “morally indefensible”, according to Spencer.

There are very good rational reasons to be skeptical of those publicly engage in or promote homosexual behaviour, and this has nothing to do with the Bible or any ideology. It’s based on biology and psychology. The sexual union of two men cannot produce offspring, they cannot start a family. Also the natural option for raising a child is for it to have a mother and a father. Of course it does not always work out like this for each individual, but promoting other types of family structures is irresponsible, in my opinion.

The youtuber, Common Filth, stated months ago that the alt-right has many overtly homosexuals characteristics to it. He has been proven right, once again. Greg Johnson, on the other hand, is not only promoting homosexuality, but is being dishonest about it. He is making out those who speak out against it to be narcissists, and misrepresenting the facts about why the anti-gay Matts were barred from the conference.

 

Links:

Gay Panic on the Alt Right: http://www.counter-currents.com/2016/03/gay-panic-on-the-alt-right/

The Rainbow Coalition: http://www.radixjournal.com/blog/2015/11/4/the-rainbow-coalition

Since some animals engage in homosexual acts, it’s natural for humans too, right?

I’ve heard the argument several times that since many different species of animals engage in homosexual behaviour, it’s normal and natural for human beings as well. Let’s look at the implications of this argument.

There are some claims that 1,500 different animals species engage in homosexual acts. Scientists don’t know how many different species there are on this planet, but Fact Monster gives the number 1,263,186 for different animal species. Assuming this is correct, it would mean that 1,500 out of that number is less that one percent. In the animal kingdom, homosexuality appears to be a curious anomaly at best.

This is also assuming these 1,500 species of animals all actually do engage in homosexual behaviour. I’m more inclined to think some of the cases of animal homosexuality have been discovered by zoologists with a political agenda of promoting homosexuality. Another possible explanation is anthropomorphization of their behaviour, i.e. scientists see animals doing something would be interpreted as gay if human beings were to do it, but it is not necessarily sexual for the animals. For example, a BBC article on homosexuality in animals quotes a scientist’s explanation of seemingly lesbian behaviour in bonobos, a species of ape, that they were “emitting grins and squeals that probably reflect orgasmic experiences” when they were rubbing their genitals together. “Probably reflect” does not equate scientific proof.

However, my aim is not to debunk animal homosexuality. It probably does exist, although I find it questionable to what extent. Also, if animals engage in homosexual behaviour, it does not necessarily conclude it is “natural” for them. Perhaps animals, the same as humans, can become perverted and engage in decadent acts for mere pleasure than ends up being harmful for them in the long run.

But let’s say that homosexuality is perfectly normal for various species of animals, and even has natural and evolutionary benefits for them. We could even say, for the sake of the argument, that half of all the animal species on earth engage in homosexual activities. Does it logically follow that human beings should do the same? No.

Human biology and psychology functions different from other animals. That’s the definition of a species; it has features that distinguish it from other species. Monkeys throw feces at each other. Does that mean that human beings should start throwing shit at each other? Unfortunately we do that figuratively over the internet every day, but it’s still something we shouldn’t do. Dogs eat shit, so should we do it too? Cats clean themselves with their tongues, so should I clean myself with my tongue? Taking a shower or a bath is much more preferable way for me to clean myself since human physiology works different to cats. Birds and reptiles lay eggs, while mammals, such as humans, don’t. Praying mantis females eat the male after copulation. Humans don’t do that, unless you take marriage to mean this figuratively. Fish live underwater, but human beings do not have gills, which means we’d drown if we tried.

Some species of fish change their sex at times. This is apparently a normal thing for these fish. I guess this means it’s natural for human beings to undergo sex change-surgery and become transgender? No. These fish do it naturally, human beings do it unnaturally by the use of technology.

I don’t think I have to go on. The argument, that since certain animals engage in homosexuality it is natural for human beings as well, is nonsensical. We are different species. What works for one species, may not necessarily hold for another. In this particular article I am not arguing that homosexuality is necessarily wrong for human beings, I’m simply pointing out the logical fallacies presented in the public in support of homosexual behaviour. However, since gay activists employ intellectually dishonest propaganda such as this for promoting the normalization of homosexuality, it makes me wonder if even they believe homosexuality is natural.

 

Links:

Think being gay is unnatural? These 11 animals will prove you wrong: http://www.gaystarnews.com/article/so-it-turns-out-giraffes-are-gayest-animal-planet231014/

1,500 animal species practice homosexuality: http://www.news-medical.net/news/2006/10/23/1500-animal-species-practice-homosexuality.aspx

Estimated Number of Animal and Plant Species on Earth: http://www.factmonster.com/ipka/A0934288.html

Are there any homosexual animals?: http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20150206-are-there-any-homosexual-animals

Sex change in animals: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_change