Nationalist parties, why a rise in power as early as the 80s?

Many European nationalist parties were launched in the late 1990s or even the early 2000s. And their rise in power has been essentially from the 2000s. This is the case in Finland with the Finns Party (from 1999), in Greece (Golden Dawn, Popular Orthodox Rally), in Hungary (Jobbik), in Norway (Progress Party), in the Netherlands (Party for Freedom), in Sweden (Sweden Democrats), etc.... So, it corresponds roughly to the agenda described in the previous article (necessity to have nationalist parties in the late 90s and early 2000s, especially on the Internet, to counter anti-illuminatis).

But there are two nationalist parties which have become important in European countries since the 1980s, this is the case of the National Front (NF) in France and the FPO in Austria (with a score of 9.7% since 1986).

It is true that there was also the Italian Social Movement. But it was stagnating at around 5% or 6%, and those scores were down from the 1970s. Similarly, there was the Vlaams Block in Belgium, which had already existed since 1978. But, at first, it was more of a separatist party than an anti-immigrant party. And he scored fairly low until the 1988 Antwerp elections when he scored 17.7%. But it was only in one town. And it didn't result in such high scores in the general election. So, in the 1980s, the only two real nationalist parties, with significant and increasing scores were the FN and the FPO.

That said, the FPO was a little behind the National Front, because it was more a populist party than a far-right party as heretical as the National Front. So his positioning was less extreme. Moreover, even if it belonged to an ideologically emblematic country (Austria, the homeland from which Hitler came), it was of much less geopolitical importance. So it had an impact, but clearly less than that of the NF.

So, in reality, it was mainly the National Front that, in the 1980s, was the great far-right party in Europe.

Once again, one can wonder why the masters of the world made these parties become important so early, when they could have made them emerge towards the end of the 90s, like the others.

In my opinion, there are several reasons.

First, it was used as a deterrent. It was important to continue to impose immigration hysterically, making it a moral problem, almost religious, therefore, a choice that is not debatable. Since Jean-Marie le Pen, the leader of the National Front, was presented as Hitler's spiritual son, who was considered then almost as the devil, to fight against the Pen was to fight against the devil, against the threat of a society with values totally contrary to those in place then, a little hell on earth, therefore clearly a religious type of fight. Moreover, French nationalists regularly complained about the "reductio ad Hitlerum", of the demonization to which they were subjected.

And it ensured that people didn't think clearly. If the debate had been dispassionate, people would have been able to say to themselves that it was not normal to bring so many immigrants without training, without money and without speaking the language, which meant that most were unemployable and this, in countries already suffering mass unemployment. But now, with the NF's rejection, people were only thinking with their guts, with their emotions. And as a result, the masters of the world could impose this immigration in European countries easily.

Nationalist movements. Why and why now?

As we have seen, during the 3rd World War between Arab and black Muslims and white Europeans, the latter will be divided into two camps: the anti-illuminatis (allied to Muslims) and the anti-Muslims (themselves divided into moderate democrats and nationalists).

Thus, the rise of nationalist movements has resulted relatively little from the political, economic and social events of the last 40 years. It's something clearly built by Jewish leaders. And of course, all nationalist leaders are Jewish or Freemasons.

If Jewish leaders had wanted there to be no nationalist movements, there would have been nothing or virtually nothing. We would have continued to celebrate the African immigrant as the new superman. We would have continued to say that crossbreeding was inevitable and enviable, and that immigration was economically necessary. And anyone criticizing that would have been blacklisted. The elite would also have put in place a few agents of influence to play the villains who are stigmatized, so that everyone is terrorized at the thought of suffering the same fate. And nobody would have said anything, not even in the private circle.

Even if they hadn't had a particular will on this, most likely nothing would have happened, because the ability of ordinary people to ally themselves is extremely weak.

So, the development of nationalist movements is something that is wanted, put in place, organized by Jewish leaders. This is all under their complete control.

 

The reason that leads them to do this is that since there will be a rise in power of Muslims, it seems normal that there will be a rise in power of nationalist movements. The second is logically the counterpart of the first.

That said, we can think that the illuminatis could have made traditional parties assume the role of nationalists. After all, they could have made them gradually change their minds regarding Muslims and become increasingly hostile to them to the point where war would seem inevitable. Then there would have been no need for nationalist movements.

But, first, it would have seemed odd if extremist movements had not developed at that time. There is an extreme left wing for economic and social issues. It would have seemed suspicious that the far right is not growing in power thanks to the question of immigration. So it was natural to make them gain followers with the arrival of mass immigration.

And second, for the Jewish leaders' plan, there must be fanatics on both sides. It helps explain a future war with the rise of extremism; whereas with moderate democrats on the white side, it lacks fanaticism and hysteria.

These two elements are not totally indispensable. But it makes the story more credible. So it is interesting for the illuminatis to have powerful nationalist movements.

But one can wonder why the illuminatis set up the nationalist movements now. Why don't they increase their power, say 10 or 20 years before the war (around 2035 or 2025)?

After all, it can then be said that because of the abuses of Muslims, democratic parties have changed their minds about them, have hardened and now want to fight them. Since Muslims will then clearly represent a danger to democracy and the Western way of life, it will seem normal for the democratic parties to become hostile to them. And before that, the illuminati can justify the fact that if they continued to bring them in Europe until 2030 or 2040, it is because they were blinded by anti-racism because of the Second World War. In fact, that is what is happening in England. The Brexit is supposed to have been voted in part because of a rejection of immigration, but all this with the classical democratic parties. So, in England, there was no need for nationalist movements to have an already slightly more restrictive policy towards immigrants. And so, we don't see why there would be a need for it in the future.

Well, already, we have the two reasons already mentioned. But there is a third one, which makes the thing indispensable.

As we have seen, during the war, there will be two opposing camps: the anti-Muslim camp and the pro-Muslim camp. And these two camps will consist of two sub-groups:

• the nationalists and the perverted democrats on one side
• the Muslims and the anti-illuminatis conspirationists on the other one.

In these two subgroups, we are interested in nationalists and anti-illuminatis conspirationists.

Here, there is a problem at the level of anti-illuminati conspirationism for the masters of the world. Without another movement facing it, it would be the only conspirationist movement, especially on the Internet.

Of course, at the level of normal people (blue pill), there is all the anti-conspiracy propaganda that allows to control them and prevent them from going to this side. At that level, there is no problem.

But all potential dissidents would risk joining this one movement. In other words, a good number of people of this kind who might otherwise be seduced by nationalism could adhere to anti-illuminatis ideas, particularly about the fact that attacks and wars are bogus. And the illuminatis don't want that. These people must continue to believe in propaganda about the terrorist attacks and think that wars are "real" (in the sense that there are real enemies and nothing is rigged). So there has to be another movement that deals with anti-illuminatis on the Internet and eventually in real life. There must be opposition to anti-illuminatis at the dissident level. There must be some counterpart.

And of course, this counterpart is the anti-Muslim nationalist movements. By having very active nationalist movements on the Internet, we have this opposition to anti-illuminatis on the ideas that the Jewish/illuminatis leaders do not want to see adopted by the anti-Muslims, notably concerning the fact that wars are arranged, that the leaders of the various camps in fact all work for the masters of the world, that the attacks are not only false flags, but even hoaxes, that there are crisis actors, etc...

And this counterpart had to be put in place as soon as the anti-illuminatis movement was launched.

And the latter had to be launched in the early 2000s. This because it took time before the war to spread these incredible ideas and because it was necessary to launch the perversion of society early enough, therefore, it was necessary to launch the anti-illuminati side so that this one makes revelations on the perversion of society.

So, since the anti-illuminatis movement had to be started in the early 2000s, anti-Muslim movements also had to be launched at that time, especially on the Internet. It was absolutely essential.

If nationalist movements were launched around 2030 or 2040, it would be too late. Anti-illuminatis conspirationists would have occupied the ground of dissident ideas for a long time. Therefore, having an anti-Muslim camp right now is necessary to prevent a part of people from adhering to the anti-illuminatis revelations.

That is why, starting around the year 2000, we saw the emergence not only of some official nationalist movements, but also of many small groups of nationalist activists acting essentially on the Internet, as well as individuals holding nationalist blogs.

In fact, it is mainly the last two that are important here. In official nationalist movements, there are mostly ordinary people who are not so likely to believe in anti-illuminatis ideas. Of course, it is still interesting to have official movements to ensure that even at this level, there is no contamination by those ideas. Especially since the power of these organizations (in terms of number of members, and recognition by the media) gives credibility to the small groups that do activism on the Internet.

But since anti-illuminatis propaganda is mainly done on the Internet and aimed at the most rebellious people to official ideas, the most important are the small groups and nationalist individuals who engage in activism on the Internet. It is they who, through their propaganda, prevent nationalists from being seduced by anti-illuminatis ideas.

They are all the more necessary as there are countries that do not have significant nationalist parties yet in 2018. In these countries too, it must be avoided that the anti-illuminati discourse dominates. Therefore, anti-Muslim propaganda on the Internet is needed to keep nationalists away from these ideas. Concerning this battle of ideas, everything is played on the Internet in several countries.

And of course, not only will the various anti-Muslim nationalist movements put forward ideas contrary to those of the anti-illuminatis on the important points we have seen above, but they will also do so in a hysterical manner.

Indeed, the anti-illuminatis camp makes revelations that seem true. Therefore, there is a risk of contamination of anti-Muslims by anti-illuminatis ideas. The mere presence of anti-Muslims and their opposition to anti-illuminatis ideas is not enough. The nationalist camp must be fanatical, hysterical on those points, so that the people who belong to it cannot be convinced by the ideas of the other camp. They must not think calmly. And their field of consciousness must be limited to the problem of Muslims alone and some other political stuff of a lower level of consciousness and therefore not at risk for the Jewish/illuminati leaders.

This is why we have extremely aggressive and often insulting reactions on nationalist sites when a person makes a comment saying that a Muslim attack is a hoax made with crisis actors or that the Second World War was staged and that Hitler was an agent of the system (we can find this kind of reactions also on mainstream sites that let nationalists react on the comments section). This is because these ideas must remain totally taboo among nationalists.

And of course, the overwhelming majority of guys who react like that on forums and blogs are agents of influence. There must be some real excited people who have been influenced by all these years of propaganda. But 99% are paid agents of influence. The true nationalists are not numerous enough to intervene on all subjects on all forums. And they wouldn't be as hysterical, aggressive, ironic, insulting, closed, etc... There's only an army of agents of influence trained for that who can carry out this kind of mission.

And for ordinary people, these reactions from nationalists seem logical. For them, nationalists are aggressive and heinous people. So it's normal for them to react hysterically and obtusely. They will not think for a second that they are agents of influence.

PS: This is also why a number of these anti-Muslim movements are more or less pro-Israel (and completely forget that it was the Jewish leaders who brought Muslims to Europe and continue to do so). Since the aim is for Europeans to approve Israel's enlargement after the war, propaganda must begin right now within the nationalist movements.

This obviously does not mean that nationalist groups that criticize Israel are not led by agents. Jewish leaders control all trends. Same thing for blogs, those which criticize Israel are not all held by true nationalists. There must be some. But most of them are run by agents.

Why do agents of influence reveal the concepts of false flags, hoaxes and crisis actors?

We saw in the previous article that it is normal for agents of influence to reveal the plan of Jewish/illuminatis leaders. It does not bother the latter since the truths revealed are only partial.

But there is one thing that seems rather incredible, it is the revelation of the system of false flags, hoax and crisis actors. There are many sites that are obviously run by agents of influence who regularly reveal new false flags and show that all terrorist attacks are actually carried out by Jewish/illuminatis leaders, and that they are hoaxes made with crisis actors.

At first glance, that sounds extraordinary. Because it seems to go totally against the interests of the elite members, since it shows that the Muslim threat is completely bogus. This is the kind of thing that could ensure that the Third World War does not take place, since many Europeans could think that all this is false and that there is no way they fight against Muslims.

And then, there are reasons to doubt about the fact that these guys are agents. And you can be led to think that, finally, the anti-illuminatis who reveal this are real dissidents, real independent conspirators and not agents of influence.

But when you think about it, you realize that it doesn't really bother the members of the elite.

Because, who's talking about false flags? The anti-illuminatis.

And what will be the role of anti-illuminatis during the 3rd World War? Well, in part to serve as allies for Muslims against anti-Muslims.

From then on, will revealing the false flag principle cause them to be against Muslims during the war? No. On the contrary, since they will know that Muslims are innocent of the crimes attributed to them, they will be all the more ready to ally themselves with them against the "hordes of Satan".

Moreover, it has the important advantage of greatly strengthening the credibility of the agents of influence. With such advanced revelations, people can only think that those who reveal them are real conspirationists and not agents working for the elite.

So, we have this extraordinary situation where agents of influence can speak freely about false flags without it hindering the Jewish/illuminatis leaders' plan for the 3rd World War. However, there is a limit, which is that these revelations can only be made in the anti-illuminatis milieu. Elsewhere, it would become problematic. But still, Jewish/illuminatis leaders can offer themselves the luxury of unveiling some of their most advanced manipulations without them hindering their final plan.

 

That said, in practice, anti-illuminatis agents of influence speak of false flags, but without saying what the purpose is for the illuminatis. The thing is almost never put into perspective in relation to more global objectives. It is part of the recurrent theme among anti-illuminatis that all the information we are given is false, but it does not go any further. As a result, the revelation loses much of its impact. Apparently, even if revealing that it is used to invent a false Muslim enemy is manageable as we have just seen, the elite must still feel that it could be a problem. Perhaps at the present time, these truths could influence some people in the anti-Muslim camp, which would be counterproductive. Thus, agents of influence generally say little or nothing about the root causes of these false flags.

However, people who discover this information about false flags could reason on their own and understand their real cause. But, as we have seen, the agents of the anti-illuminati camp generally do not talk about the war to come against the Muslims (or in a few lines). They focus essentially on the arrival of a Satanist society, the antichrist and other demons. So, the overwhelming majority of people who read this information about false flags will not make the connection between them and a possible 3rd World War against Muslims. In order for these people to establish the link by themselves (since anti-illuminatis agents do not), the anti-illuminatis should also regularly speak of a possible war against Muslims. But they don't.

So, in theory, Jewish/illuminatis leaders could reveal the reasons for false flags. But in practice, it could be quite risky and since they don't like the risk, they don't do it (at least for the moment). But, they can reveal the existence of the false flag system itself without it being problematic for them. As long as the real causes of these are not given, everything is fine.

 

Where it would really be surprising is if some nationalists also revealed the principle of false flags, hoaxes and crisis actors. By this I mean the fact that the overwhelming majority of attacks are actually bogus. Now, that would really go against the interests of the illuminatis. Because there, many anti-Muslims could say to themselves that since the attacks are bogus, Muslims are not the bloodthirsty fools of Allah whom they are told and that there is no way they will fight against them.

But, on the anti-Muslim side, nobody reveals the principle of false flags, with the exception of a few rather particular ones. On the contrary, as soon as an anti-illuminati comes to speak of false flag regarding a terrorist attack, most nationalists (mainly agents of influence) criticize him hysterically. On the anti-Muslim side, the false flag principle is almost totally taboo.

It shows that the nationalist side is completely under control, because most false flags are obvious. So if they were honest, some nationalists should talk about it (I mean people who have a blog or a website). But no, nobody does. Nobody does it because nearly all of them are agents.

In fact, there are some false flags that are revealed in the nationalist milieu. But it's essentially when it affects Russian interests. Here, all of a sudden, it is acceptable in this political milieu to talk about false flags (generally presented as made by Americans of course). As it remains within the framework of the influence game between states, and as it concerns only a rather small number of events, it does not lead to any major questioning. Nationalists will not extend the concept to all attacks (whereas this is the case among anti-illuminatis; for them, all attacks are false flags). So that's not a problem for the elite.

And they hardly ever talk about hoax. For them, even for the very rare times they speak of false flags, they almost always admit that something really happened and that the people involved in the affair are real people, but manipulated by this or that power. As a result, the concept of crisis actors is also unknown to them.

So, we are very far from the impact of the anti-illuminatis revelations concerning this subject.

And one can think that if there are these few revelations concerning false flags on the nationalist side, it is probably partly to counter the concept that is proposed on the anti-illuminati side. This allows saying that on the nationalist side, people are not closed to the concept of state manipulation regarding terrorist attacks.

Why do agents of influence like Alex Jones reveal the illuminati project?

Regarding the previous article, one may wonder how it is that notorious Intel agents like Alex Jones and others of this kind give us a lot of information about illuminati signs and illuminati people present in the media and elsewhere and about the plan of establishing a more or less satanic society.

Since they are agents, they will obviously not tell us the truth. The Jewish/illuminati leaders have no reason to warn us of their manipulations of the masses and of their great plan to establish an illuminati society. This is counterproductive.

Of course, one could answer that they now feel so powerful that they practically operate in the open, as if to taunt us, or to enjoy their domination even better. The problem in this case is: why aren't there any blogs maintained since 15 years by disinformation agents who inform us of the manipulation concerning the Third World War? They don't warn us because that's the real purpose. Thus, all of a sudden, there's no agent saying anything about that.

So, we're facing a problem. If that's not true, then it makes sense. These agents of influence direct us to a dead-end to waste our time and prevent us from fighting over the real issues. A normal tactic for an agent. The problem, from what we can see, is what they say sounds real. There are a lot of stars who make illuminati signs. There are illuminati themes in many films. The leaders of many countries enact laws that fit perfectly with the illuminati plan, such as euthanasia, legalization of drugs, etc... But if this is true, they have no reason to warn us. So we are facing an illogical situation.

But with what we saw in the previous article, plus a little bit of thinking, we easily understand that this illogicality is only apparent.

In fact, it is true and false in the sense that it will be true, but only partly and above all temporarily. So, in the end, it will turn out to be false, and people will think that these revelations were bogus. So, in the long run, it's not embarrassing for the illuminatis to reveal all that. Agents like Alex Jones seem to be right at the time. But after the 3rd world war, as the illuminatis will stop showing illuminati signs in the media and passing laws suggesting that an illuminati society is developing, they will appear to have been wrong. Besides, that's only one side of the problem. So it's not really a problem to make revelations about it.

Toward a satanic/illuminati society?

Since the end of the 90s we can see that there is an increasingly obvious presence of illuminati and satanic people and signs in the media. Many stars of music, television, and cinema openly make signs of this kind. A lot of music videos show them everywhere and develop illuminated and satanic themes. And it's the same thing in movies. In short, they hardly hide any more.

The first thought we have when we see this surge is that from now on, their power is so great and they are so sure that the people will remain apathetic that they can do whatever they want and show themselves in the open. We can also think that there is an agenda to impose the illuminati religion openly in a few decades.

But in fact, I think it's mostly staging for World War III.

As we have seen previously on this blog, the current goal of world leaders is to wage a third world war that will oppose corrupt but democratic white people against uncorrupt but dictatorial and extremist Muslims.

In this context, the sudden invasion of illuminati signs and stars in the media is normal. It is necessary to make the world believe that a satanic society is taking shape. This way, the Third World War will take the form of a holy war on the Islamist side; a holy war quite justified from their point of view. Since they are believers in God, fighting against the advent of Satan or an abominable satanic society is logical.

So I think this rise in illuminatism is a sham. It's just a temporary thing to justify the war between whites and Arabs and black Muslims in Europe. When the war is over, the world elite will end all this illuminati circus in the media and elsewhere and set up new oppositions for a fourth world war.

What goes in this direction is the fact that world leaders are doing this (showing the illuminati power in broad daylight) while bringing millions of Muslims to Europe. A priori, if their goal was really to set up a satanic world, their interest would be rather to keep the Europeans, who are now quite unreligious, together, to be able more easily to impose the illuminati society in this region of the world. After that, since Europeans are much stronger militarily than Arabs, it would be child's play to subdue Arab countries. In fact, world leaders should never have promoted decolonization, since then, Arabs and blacks were under white rule.

And by bringing in millions of Muslims more fertile than Europeans, Jewish/illuminatis leaders take a risk that the Muslim religion will finally impose itself in Europe and that their Satanist plan will be defeated (at least in Europe). Of course, they could subvert Muslims as Europeans have been subverted. But it makes achieving the goal less easy and slower. It is also true that this does not pose a fundamental problem in Europe, since, as we have seen, Muslims will be defeated in the Third World War and expelled from this region of the world. But it's really making life very complicated for nothing. And it delays the plan at the global level, since if world leaders do that, they will still have to convert Muslims after the war. And it will take all the more time because at that moment, these will be ultra-fanatics. So it could take another 100 or 200 years to convert Muslims to Satanism. And that's not the elite type to be so complicated and inefficient. Generally, they go to the simplest and most effective way.

So bringing millions of Muslims to Europe clearly suggests that this advent of the illuminati religion at the level of the masses that can be seen in the media is just a temporary element of the elite's strategy for World War III. Now, that makes total sense.

Then, one could also say that even if the immediate principal objective is the third world war, they will thereafter keep the illuminati religion and maintain a Satanist society. So we would have a medium-term objective, which would be the third world war, and another in the longer term, which would be the creation of a Satanist society.

It's a possibility. But I think that won't be the case. First, it is not in the interest of the elite to come out in the open. But that is what would happen if the illuminati power was no longer something known only by the elite. Everyone would know that there is on one side the hereditary elite (the same as the royalty and nobility of ancient times) and on the other side, the peons. Moreover, people would know that it is global and that there is no possibility of revolution.

In addition, in the context of a Satanist society, this elite would not be of the benevolent genre, as kings were supposed to be in their time, but kind of pedophile psychopaths, child killers, torturers, assassins, slavers, etc.... All this in the open. Not a very good thing to lead people.

This is also the case at the grassroots level of society. A world with satanic anti-values doesn't seem really viable. How to make people accept to work, to marry, to have children in a satanic society where it is normal that there is no fidelity, that children can be raped by adults without parents being able to say anything, where the worker is only an ultra-poor slave, or the citizen has no rights, and where the human being in general is only a commodity that can be killed when he is no longer useful? a world centered on sex and violence, lies, deception, the law of the strongest, etc..., etc... And all this, unlike now, not hidden, but exhibited and claimed without complex? Already, these days, people don't have too many children in white and Asian countries. There, it is obvious that practically nobody would make some any more. And the motivation to work would also collapse.

And the extreme poverty implied by the ruthless exploitation of the people by the elite goes against a hyper sexualized and totally childish society. When you barely have enough to eat, and you have to work like crazy to earn just few bucks, you're not going to have fun making orgies all the time and playing on your smartphone. Thus, certain characteristics of a Satanist society contradict each other completely.

And also, if it was their final plan from the beginning, they would have tried to impose it long ago. They could very well have given this direction since 1750, when the authority of the church was being called into question in Europe. Then, we could have already been in a Satanist society for 50 or 100 years. If they didn't do it before, but just now, it's because in reality, it's not their final goal.

Moreover, why not try to impose this Satanist orientation in Muslim societies? Since they're totally under control too, nothing's stops the elite to do so? And they could have done it a very long time ago, 100 or 200 years ago. So if they have not done so before and are not doing so now, this is much probably because it's not their final objective. Their objective, at least at the moment, is the third world war between white Europeans and Muslims. And it is all the more obvious that at present instead of trying to subvert the latter, they are trying on the contrary to make them as rigid as possible, to make them people rejecting all freedom of modern sexual and social mores (and I am not even talking about sexual perversions that the illuminati try to introduce, like pedophilia or public orgies and so on).

So, in my opinion, the perversion of society, Satanism, the Illuminatis showing themselves in the open, all this only makes sense in the context of the opposition between white Europeans and Muslims during the 3rd World War. It's only temporary and the Jewish/illuminatis leaders will move on once World War III is over.

Why did we get these three false flags in England in 2017?

So, we have got two more false flags in the UK in less than 15 days (Manchester on May 22 and the London Bridge on June 3) after the one of March 22. Why there and why then? If you have read my paper about what countries will fall on the Islamic side before World War III, and the one about the Brexit, the answer is quite simple. My opinion is that England will stay on the European side during the war. And the goal of the Brexit was precisely to allow that. With the Brexit and more hard laws against immigration, England will be able to stay preserved from a massive immigration and thus, won't have a Muslim government.
 

But, as the Brexit was quite strange (since, not long before it, anti-European forces were supposed to represent just a little part of the population), this decision from English people had to be confirmed during the next elections in order to appear as a trend and not an oddity. And the next important elections are the one of the 8th of June 2017.

And Jewish/Illuminati leaders needed also to have this hostile politics against migrant to keep going on. Thus, they needed to still have right wing parties elected at the head of the country.

So, if those false terrorist attacks were made in GB at this very moment, this was on purpose. Jewish/Illuminati leaders didn't choose the location and the moment randomly. They did it for the two reasons I have given, that is : 1) to still have the conservative government at the head of England ; and 2) to "confirm" the Brexit trend.

And we can think that the attacks in France in 2015 (in January against "Charlie Hebdo" and in November against the "Bataclan") were made in relation with this plan. The nearest continental country of England had to be perceived as a terrorists lair. This meant that the terrorist danger was at the doors of England, justifying the exit from the European Union. This was of course not the only reason for people to vote for the Brexit. But it added another reason.

Same thing for the Calais Jungle. This refugee and migrant encampment near Calais, and thus, near the Channel tunnel leading to the UK was created on purpose by Jewish/Illuminati leaders to justify even more the Brexit. Here is the resume from Wikipedia:

"The Calais Jungle was an informal term for a refugee and migrant encampment in the vicinity of Calais, France. Many who lived in this camp attempted to illegally enter the United Kingdom via the Port of Calais or the Eurotunnel by stowing away on lorries, ferries, cars, or trains travelling to the UK.[2] The camp gained global attention during the peak of the European migrant crisis in 2015 when the population of the camp rapidly grew and French authorities began carrying out evictions." 

So, during 2015 and the beginning of 2016, because of the European migrant crisis, the situation began to appear as out of control. The French government seemed unable to manage this encampment. And, as the media said that migrants and refugees wanted to go specifically to the United Kingdom and were able to do it almost freely because of the Channel Tunnel, it was easy for Jewish/Illuminati leaders to say that English people felt it as a threat and have voted for the Brexit partly because of that.

And of course, the terrorist attacks in France perpetrated at the same time pushed even more people toward the Brexit vote (in their mind, many of those illegal migrants in the Calais Jungle were potential terrorists). Or at least, it allowed Jewish/illuminati leaders to explain more easily the Brexit vote (since it's quite sure that the elections were fraudulent).

We can also think that, in order to justify a harsher politics against migrants, Jewish/Illuminati leaders will produce at least 2 or 3 others false flags on the English soil. I think it will be more convincing. The first three were good to justify the election of a conservative government, but they are probably not enough to justify new laws against immigration. With 2 or 3 more terrorist attacks, the conservative government will be able to promulgate new laws without anybody questioning them.

The Brexit

Some weeks ago, I predicted that England would stay White during World War III (that is, they won't fall on the Islamic side to the contrary of France, Germany, Italy, Belgium and the Netherlands). I think the Brexit is consistent with this idea. It was a necessary step to justify this situation.

 Europe just before World War III. As you see on this map I made, England will be on the White side (in white), not the Islamic one (in red).

With England leaving the European Union, it will be easier for Jewish leaders to justify English laws preventing more massive immigration and thus, to justify ultimately that this country won't fall on the Muslim side

So, of course, the result of the Brexit wasn't a result of the free will of English people. It was falsified so Jewish leaders get what they want.

If Jewish leader hadn't wanted the Brexit, it would have never been discussed in the first place. And of course, there would never have been a referendum. Also, you wouldn't have seen those Illuminati artists, actors, singers, etc.., defending the Brexit (people like Michael Caine, John Cleese, Roger Daltrey, Elizabeth Hurley). The secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, John Whittingdale, a member of the English government (which is anti-Brexit), would never have dared to make pro-Brexit declarations. Those guys did that because they were ordered to do so.

The false death of Jo Cox (a complete hoax of course) was ordered by Jewish leaders in order to introduce confusion in the mind of conspirationists (that is, people who think). It is very important for Jewish leaders to avoid at all cost that those people understand the real goal of all this. They made those people wrongly think it was a false flag made to convince English people to vote against the Brexit; this because the Illuminati or the Jewish leaders want a one world government. The emphasis in the conspirationist sphere was put on the similarity with the death of Anna Lindh in order to reinforce this idea of a false flag conceived to make the anti-Brexit side wins (see here for example).

Finally, with the victory of the Brexit, those people will think that the Illuminati/Jewish leaders don't control everything and that people can rebel against them with success. They don't understand that Jewish leaders in fact wanted the Brexit to happen. It's a part of their plan for World War 3. And, above all, they still don't understand that everything is staged from the beginning to the end, and that there is nothing like free political movements and famous guys (actors, singers, politicians…) being on the side of the population, or Jewish leaders leaving elections results to chance. They keep their naïve idea that with a little bit of good will from people, and with the help of the few honest politicians, things will be able to change.

I haven't been able to predict the Brexit with certainty before it happens because my reflection about England staying White was too recent. This week, I scented that it would be possible. But, as I think we are still far away from the war, and as the possible result wasn't sure, I thought it was possible that the referendum was a first step toward the real Brexit. So, I wasn't completely sure about what would happen, even if in my opinion the Brexit was very possible. With that in mind, the result doesn't surprise me at all. It's completely logical.