Controlling Britains Prime ministers (help needed with a theory)

The question that has been jangling around my mind is the motivation of politicians to do the nefarious deeds that they do, how are they controlled?, why do they do the things that they do?, could it be the threat on their families?, all of the british prime ministers that i have looked at have families except for one who is a suspected paedophile, all of these are control factors, i am having some difficulties in finding if any of the prime ministers have have changed their stance on policies after (and if they have) maybe losing a child, or any revealing signs of a family threat policy change,


i am sure someone on here will have the answers, I am still researching and will update as i go

a reply to: THELONIO

If they are conservative, then the go-to tactic would be drugs and prostitutes.

Cameron lost a child (and I don't mean the one he left in the pub), and the sick arsehole uses that a lot to get sympathy when loosing an argument on say the NHS.

I don't think anyone controls them, I think they are just out of touch with reality.

originally posted by: woogleuk
Cameron lost a child (and I don't mean the one he left in the pub), and the sick arsehole uses that a lot to get sympathy when loosing an argument on say the NHS.

I don't think anyone controls them, I think they are just out of touch with reality.

He's an Old Etonian whose links to the Tory Establishment go back for decades. He has absolutely no idea what constitutes reality. Give him a normal job with a normal salary and he'd be lost or dead inside a day.

a reply to: THELONIO

I know we have mixed opinions about Alex Jones on ATS, but here's an interview that I listened to the other day that I found very fascinating. This fellow was known as the DC Madam (one of 2 given that moniker), but unlike the other he catered exclusively to the homosexual aspect of the DC power brokers. This interview is, essentially, about the use of sex bribery in politics. It's pretty interesting and worth a watch. Peace...

The Electric Priest

a reply to: woogleuk

what was in it for blair selling the country down the river, Maybe they have ideoligies when the get into power but then the hand of control comes down on them, they may risk their own lives but never their children, all of the prime ministers had children expt for edward heath edward heat paedo

a reply to: TheElectricPriest

many thanks, these are definitely methods of control, i am sure paedophiles will do most anything to keep the kids coming and not be exposed

a reply to: THELONIO

Blair, like other PM's, followed a certain other country far too much...and that is where the problem lies.

The one and only time i have felt proud of any British government was when they refused to follow that other certain country into Syria....lo and behold, that certain other country also backed down when it realised it wasn't going to get the support of a much needed ally (and much slander was spoken upon us by certain members of that certain countries government as a result).

Waging war to protect an alliance is a piss poor excuse to maintain that alliance.

To become Prime Minister of the U.K, you must be a Bilderberger. Cameron, Miliband and Clegg are Bilderbergers.

You want to know who controls events, start with the Bilderberg group.

a reply to: THELONIO

I only offer this up for your consideration because of Britain being one of the five eyes origination's . When you figure out how and who sent the message out we can have a real juicy thread .

originally posted by: THELONIO
a reply to: TheElectricPriest

many thanks, these are definitely methods of control, i am sure paedophiles will do most anything to keep the kids coming and not be exposed

And he expressly discusses pedophilia in his talk. Apparently he was under a lot of pressure to provide children as part of his overall services, but claims to have vehemently refused. Apparently, however, these things are all set-ups that are filmed and recorded (according to this fellow) in order to subsequently lord over those who hold "power".

a reply to: the2ofusr1

That was nothing more than a plagiarising speech-writer (Owen Lippert) who admitted he had done it and resigned as a result.

Who controls the government?
Look no further than the hands of the Spitting Image crew

Here's one that our US friends might like

it is ALL a game, and as players, they must abide by the rules. the rules are 'the house always wins'. but you won't lose quite as bad as everyone else if you play ball. failing that, we have your tabloid-friendly sexual exploits on record if you choose to disobey.

that's good, we knew you'd see sense.

a reply to: TheElectricPriest

Have you watched this one by James Corbett . Same subject but has a ton of material that is in the public domain but not on msm

originally posted by: woogleuk
a reply to: the2ofusr1

That was nothing more than a plagiarising speech-writer (Owen Lippert) who admitted he had done it and resigned as a result.

How much time was between the speeches being read and the resignation? Just wondering.

a reply to: woogleuk

When they need to throw someone under the bus they will . Think Duffy and the others .

Voting for a PM is no different than voting for a mask.
The people behind the mask are never seen in MSM. They tend to keep a low profile. Just follow the money and you'll get to see some of them.

a reply to: the2ofusr1

I have not, but most certainly will. Thanks for the heads up.

The Electric Priest

originally posted by: Cobaltic1978
To become Prime Minister of the U.K, you must be a Bilderberger. Cameron, Miliband and Clegg are Bilderbergers.

You want to know who controls events, start with the Bilderberg group.

It's more like that if you show PM potential, you get invited to Bilderberg meeting