Brexit | The First Brick in the Wall?

Does Brexit represent a victory for the common man or it another engineered event in an evil plot for world domination, globalism & the New World Order?

14 thoughts on “Brexit | The First Brick in the Wall?”

  1. The media and news is completely controlled Notice how most of the news is devised to make us feel doom and gloom for leaving the EU, how they are carefuly selecting people who voted to stay in, to moan about leaving and now even using crises actors to say they voted leave but regret it . Notice how they have not asked any of the leave voters how happy and relived we are to be on the road of being free of EU control and there ARE loads of us , and how they are cut and shutting news from Brussels . Not to mention the adding of racism , that I myself have only seen from a small select few of stay voters accusing leave voters of being , Just another way for the governing body to spread fear and hate. If I was not getting my news from another source I too would feel only doom and gloom from what they are showing on the news. we are smarter than that ,And remember that it was once said , the easiest way to make war is to turn man against his bother. plus if they make us have fear and regret they can control that we Don’t do it again in the future as they are now panicking that we the people saw through there lies 🙂

  2. Hi Nathan,
    I’m so enjoying your stuff. I do need to challenge you for more evidence regarding Musk. I have felt that solar and EV’s are inevitable for several reasons. EV’s lose less than 20% of “fuel” energy (the battery charge) through waste heat, whereas ICEs (Internal Combustion Engines) lose greater than 80% of the fuel’s energy through waste heat. Once batteries hit a certain price per kWh of storage capacity, EVs will be far less expensive to own, operate and maintain than ICEs, plus the the green aspects of less pollutants per mile. We are now very close to cheap batteries. Solar has a similar argument, just in terms of present official economics. Utility scale solar is now cheaper than natural gas and coal. I used to think these technologies (which should also include wind, and efficiency) were key to a more peaceful and healthy world, though I now believe most things can be co-opted for centralized economic power. Another problem with “smart” technology is the ability to surveil. Musk may blow it, but I don’t think because EVs and solar are not going to continue their accelerating adoption. What do you think?

    1. The business model for SolarCity is based on leasing people equipment, which means they have to provide the capital and the product up front and rely on their debtors to be able to pay their rent into the foreseeable future. They are currently bleeding about $700M per year and would go bankrupt if the deal with Tesla to buy them doesn’t go through.
      Solar is the future, but innovation happens in a free market. Elon is the world’s richest welfare queen.

  3. Yes Brexit is the first “brick in the wall” – for TTIP, which needed an exit vote to really get what it wanted – far away from some of the opposition in Europe. There is suspicion that those northernmost EU countries who kept their currencies (several sovereign currencies already up after Britain’s vote to exit) will eventually depart the EU leaving the illusion of “no choice” but to create a Trans-Atlantic Trading Block via TTIP.

    Probably one of the most destructive belief systems to ever grip the populace is seeing politicians as bumbling idiots. Thru this belief, whole populations looked the other way (whilst feeding their own egos) as collusion, cronyism and the “corporatocracy” system took hold. It’s easy to see the failures acted out in political theatre as idiocy, because that is what the system needs to thrive without being held accountable. In this game of strategy, we assume they are truthful in their campaigns. If they campaign for gun control, they must want gun control and are simply too stupid to see that this 15 year campaign has actually backfired; gun sales had fallen to all time lows during a time of prosperity & perceived freedom but since 2002 (just after the rollout of programs increasing surveillance & removing liberties) gun sales have soared about 54% or a steady 10% increase every year for 7 years depending on interpretation of the data. So, evidently after 15 years and loads of data, politicians are too dumb to realise that the prospect of losing liberties would cause us to respect our rights all the more? That’s quite doubtful in my opinion. Everyone is familiar with a child who’s grown tired of toy will cherish it more at the mention of its loss.

    What politicians are quite capable and successful with these campaigns is dividing the population, creating division & disunity which effectively prevents “revolution” but even better it prevents the population from coming together and creating an “evolution” of the system. Money & power love revolutions, however it clearly seeks to prevent any evolutionary system from appearing and making this current system irrelevant – that would be disastrous – this would mean true freedom for the populations and the disappearance of this archaic system of governance. While we disagree, argue amongst some perceived “other side”, this fatal blow will never come to fruition. Pretty clever, if you ask me.

    As for lawyers being “our friends”, it would be nice if they were – certainly a hopeful belief. Rather, lawyers are members of the political class, many of them either former politicians or plan to enter politics, officially, since they are a massive part of the political machine as it stands. Lawyers are smart, ambitious, and like doctors in that if they entered the field with good intentions, they are generally crooked and cynical within a few years of graduation. Lawyers worked hand in hand to destroy the Tort system, giving more power and less accountability to large corporations.

    Yep, this is a long comment, consider it a love letter. While I value your insight, admire your hope (and hope in many ways that hope alone can give us strength to rise above), I do disagree with some of the many points covered in this video. Thanks.

  4. Seems logical to me. I think they screwed up.

    Talking of 9/11 and “controlled demoliton”, there’s much more to the story than we are being lead to believe. If you have the time to look into 9/11 and the destruction of the WTC (all seven buildings not just 1, 2 and 7), and I know that’s a big “if”, I would recommend looking at the work of Dr Judy Wood PhD ( an American former Professor of Mechanical Engineering, and her book (actually a 500-page textbook of forensic evidence) “Where Did The Towers Go – Evidence of Directed Free Energy Technology on 9/11”. It came out of left field about 8 years ago and has suffered from rigorous and ruthless opposition, as has Dr Wood herself, by the forces that wish to cover up the truth about that day and for which purpose have enormous financial and manpower resources available to them to at any cost keep awareness of the existence of free energy technology suppressed.

    If and when you are interested let me know and I can direct you towards material that can give you an overview of the most significant evidence that she has uncovered.

    1. This Dr. Judy Wood may be correct, other theories of “how” the buildings went down could be correct but the focus and infighting resulting over “How” instead of “Who & Why” seems to be a destructive movement in general. It’s pretty sad that even within the community of those who realise 9/11 was planned & allowed to happen, people can’t come together to actually rise up against this system but rather splinter off into sub groups bickering over the minute details. So in that way, it’s quite destructive to awareness as whole. If you want to talk about the suppression of free energy, that goes back at least to Tesla and likely even further and 9/11 need not figure in to the subject since obviously the means of destruction had very little to do with the goals of said destruction.

      1. Your comment is quite general on a very complex subject, but to answer your main points:

        1. “the focus and infighting resulting over “How” instead of “Who & Why” seems to be a destructive movement in general.”
        I would suggest that the 9/11 Truth Movement was formed for exactly that purpose, to create infighting and obfuscate the facts. I have seen enough evidence of shillery to be convinced of that; for example, Richard Gage’s Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth is pushing the thermite theory which has been discredited. Dr Wood’s evidence shows thermal (jet fuel) and kinetic (thermite) energetic forces were not the cause but rather a magnetic electro-gravitic nuclear reaction (low energy nuclear reaction), and the very important anomalous seismic and magnetometer records for 9/11 which she documents in her book have never been successfully refuted by her detractors.

        Without knowing the “how” the “who” cannot be brought to justice. Richard Gage has promised an independent re-investigation based on his discredited thermite theory. What better way to discredit 9/11 truth and kick it into touch permanently than to try to disprove the official theory with yet another baseless theory.

        Andrew Johnson’s website – – details at great length the people involved in the continuing cover up and their distraction and disinfo methods.

        2. ” 9/11 need not figure in to the subject [of free energy]”
        If the destruction of the total WTC complex was achieved through directed free energy technology then I think humanity has a right and a need to know that technology of such colossal power and potential to transform our existence for the better, in hitherto unimagineable ways, has been secretly weaponised and used against us. The whole world saw what happened at the WTC on 9/11, and I can think of very little that is more worthwhile than turning that depressing tragedy round 180 degrees to reflect a beacon of light into the lives of all humanity all living things on the planet.

        3. As for the “who and why”, which seems so important to everyone, I recently came across the author Prof Joseph Farrell – – and his theory of a three-level involvement in 9/11: the Arab patsies, the US deep state, and the rising fourth reich global nazi network. He takes the “who” further than most and may be closer to the truth ….. but I still maintain that without pinning down the exact mechanism that brought down the Towers we cannot be sure of either the identity of the perpetrators or their purpose.

        1. Then we see things rather differently. In my opinion, we were a rather trusting population, believed our government, world governments & large corporations to be in collusion and wildly dishonest. Most people were not of the mindset that governments, working in collusion, would stage such a stunt in order to further their ends. While we may not know each conspirators name it’s rather easy to ask “who benefits” from this situation and determine who had a hand in it. Looking back we realise, as is common in all these staged events, there is a tidy calling card proudly broadcast amidst each ridiculous hoax and false flag.

          The “How” movement is the one thing most cannot agree upon and has divided the community, purposefully of course for division & bickering prevents any movement from gaining traction. The only hope of changing anything comes from the public understanding exactly who influences their government, what it’s willing to do to maintain control and the personal realization that every level of government – no matter how small or local – is controlled and does not work “for the people”. No one will be “brought to Justice” because the Justice Department is corrupt and a lapdog for the administration, insiders will not come forward, there is also no way to prove anything. So that is the fantasy behind why the “How” movement is destructive.

          As for general – who are “the Arab patsies, the US deep state, and the rising fourth Reich global Nazi network”? Seems like you are reading from a Michael Crichton novel and while these articles and novels may be interesting, they are so vague that they create a fictional shadowy world rather than expose anything. Rather than reading the work of others, do your own research, encourage others to find a better system of governance – that’s the only real way to affect any change.

          Now regarding free energy, suppressed for at least a century, if people did their own research rather than chasing phantoms it is plainly obvious that free and clean energy has been suppressed right out in the open. 9/11 is not the way to prove anything regarding free energy because there is no proof left. The destruction of the towers was not a demonstration to show off a new toy nor was it the first domino to fall, it was simply one in a long line leading to united global domination that happened to affect civilians. All these things are not sealed in some underground vault, do your own research and you’ll see, quite cleverly, it’s all hidden in plain sight.

          1. “Seems like you are reading from a Michael Crichton novel”.

            I gave you a link to Farrell’s website and his books are for sale on Amazon so a bit of research on your part would have confirmed that he is not a novelist.

            I have to disagree with you that reading other people’s work should not be part of one’s own research. There is much to be gained from others research as long as the sources are thoroughly referenced.

            I believe I am fortunate to have the time to explore what many would dismiss as exotic fantasy or imaginative speculation, but “Man cannot live by bread alone.”

          2. I was not literally implying that you were in fact reading a fictional novel. It may be fiction, doesn’t really matter. Obviously you are only responding to the parts of my comment which suit your support of this divisive campaign. Have at it and rest assured not one person will be brought to justice, the system will not change, free energy & better energy will continue to be suppressed as it has for over a century (at least). As Orwell so aptly put it: “If you want a vision of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face – forever.”

  5. According to your last video, want would happen economically if something like black death (year 1350) happen ? 40% fatality in Europe. Today, less than 5% lost of the system would be catastrophic because every thing are interelated.

  6. Lawyers will save the world… Nathan, come on, are you serious? I rate lawyers below politicians and that’s REALLY low. Lawyers are bottom feeding scumbags that thrive off of peoples troubles.

  7. merci

    We have free speech until it become a problem with the people in power. Maybe we have to deal with the people in power, and the real solution is to civilise and to educate people. But people don’t really want to be educated. So I ask myself :” why do I give a shit about humanity”

    Thank you for your video on youtube (y)

    1. “people don’t really want to be educated. ” Don’t blame “the people”, blame “the education system”; aka “Don’t blame the players, blame the game”.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *