It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The most powerful unelected man in Britain

page: 2
7
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 15 2014 @ 04:35 AM
link   
a reply to: boymonkey74

And Obama is gonna put me in a fema camp? blimey I didn't know that :O.
lol.




posted on Jul, 15 2014 @ 04:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: boymonkey74
a reply to: boymonkey74

And Obama is gonna put me in a fema camp? blimey I didn't know that :O.
lol.


Lol, it is all conjecture, I do admit that... But i was just making a point. The state of international relations makes it hard to tell what might happen tomorrow, or what any of the big players is REALLY up to.



posted on Jul, 15 2014 @ 05:42 AM
link   
a reply to: boymonkey74

Before I go out I just wanted to add that I don't know Hague personally. So I admit that he may be a good guy.
I honestly don't know.
However he was the man standing against Blair when he got in on false pretence.
Blair was also a admitted pot smoking ex guitar player who promised that 'things can only get better' and Hague is also a admitted pot smoker. That seems a worrisome thing in some ways, as it makes him more accepted by the liberally minded.

Looking back now we can see that Blair was a wolf in sheeps clothing, and people are quick to admit that he was way far right of centre for a lefty labour boy... In other words a conservative dream come true in terms of a labour leader.

All I wanted to do with this thread was make people aware that there MAY be more going on than meets the eye...
I mean look at the numerology of the date Hague was appointed leader of the house 14/7/14

The elite are apparently ALL about this sort of stuff aren't they?

Is it ALL a coincidence? Or is something more weird going on?

I'm just saying let's be aware of these issues... Just in case!



posted on Jul, 15 2014 @ 06:00 AM
link   
a reply to: Lagrimas

Is the government not a Constitutional Monarchy?

If the Queen can dissolve the governments of commonwealth members why is it concerning that she can appoint someone to a position?

Or am I missing the concern?



posted on Jul, 15 2014 @ 06:01 AM
link   
Hague is one of the main players who has covered up the Elite Peadophilia Ring.
He is also most likely (and has been named) as a Peadophile him self.

I agree with the OP.

There's lots of 'shuffling' happening in arliament as we speak.



posted on Jul, 15 2014 @ 06:14 AM
link   
a reply to: MysterX

I think Hague's moving proves my point. this is top news and would have been leaked ages ago were it true he wanted to leave.



posted on Jul, 15 2014 @ 06:16 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

One of the paedophile lists contains names which include a member of the Royal Household - so the Queen is desperate to keep this quiet as she knows her popularity and that of having royals today is questioned by probably the majority and she won't want to leave all the british wealth she sits on behind. I actually don't know how much wealth was brought to Britain from Germany by them when they were perched on the throne.



posted on Jul, 15 2014 @ 06:17 AM
link   
a reply to: MysterX


The reason for the reshuffle is obvious...they are trying to capture the middle class female vote by stocking the cabinet with them, trying to shake off the stuffy 'old boy network' image.

Yes and Cameron thinks we can't see this.

I think these women are not being promoted due to their expertise or experience or anything that involves doing a good job, but rather they've been promoted only because they're female. I don't have much confidence in the Tories as it is, but this has seriously undermined what little of it I had.

With just a few months left before the election, how on Earth can these people learn the years worth of knowledge needed in order to do their jobs properly, in just a few months?



posted on Jul, 15 2014 @ 06:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: doobydoll

With just a few months left before the election, how on Earth can these people learn the years worth of knowledge needed in order to do their jobs properly, in just a few months?

They dont need to, they just follow whats inside the little brown envelopes.



posted on Jul, 15 2014 @ 06:22 AM
link   
a reply to: Lagrimas

I think they have always been after a world government but unless our world is threatened by some form of outside menace, the different world governments are quite unlikely to amalgamate. Governments attract very powerful personalities and we all know rothschild whose main bid for power is financing both sides in a war, thereby making nation states in debt to him so they each have to do his bidding lest he bankrupt them,would probably find even he has bitten off far more than he can gummy away. I say good luck. Hopefully many of these old cretins will die soon but who we get in their places will be for another day but fortunately we know their game will it will be another issue for the younger ones to worry about.



posted on Jul, 15 2014 @ 06:27 AM
link   
a reply to: doobydoll

I don't think cameron was bothered about the middle-class vote at all because he has, like in America done his earnest to tax and destroy the middle class - too many getting too near to the elite.

No one in their right mind unless under extreme duress would change their cabinet at such a close time to an election unless forced to, because if they did not act to rid the paedo rings would bring down the conservatives and probably a few others in parliament and powerful backers and civil servants.

Since Maggie thatchers time the worry for the conservatives is that we are an ungovernable country, hence the false flags and bringing in of all the new legislation to control our rights and of course the spying on us. Its when you step back and look at the overall picture you get it in gloryfying technicolour context.



posted on Jul, 15 2014 @ 06:34 AM
link   
a reply to: Shiloh7

I did not realize the extent of that mess. Makes sense for being concerned then.

thanks for the education.

edit on 15-7-2014 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 15 2014 @ 07:07 AM
link   
ok lets have a reality check - primarily for those who are unfamiliar with the UK government [ the OP being the most unfamiliar in this thread so far ]

the leader of the house of commons is a cabinet appointment [ as detailed in the wikki article ] if you have an inate distrust of wikki - then use the official govt website though ifno is spread over multiple pages

further the leader MUST be an elected MP [ certain ministers can be drawn from the house of lords - or simply appointed - but the majority have a pre-requisite of being an sitting MP ]

so by the OPS " definition " - the priminister is infact "the most powerfull unelected man un great Britain " as the pre-requisites and appointment path for both PM and leader of the commons are identical

having got that out of the way - I chose to ignore the rest of the OP claims - not because I agree with them - but because thiey are unevidenced illogical rantings - and I have better things to do



posted on Jul, 15 2014 @ 07:09 AM
link   
Mind you seen the lady who is in charge of employment



posted on Jul, 15 2014 @ 09:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: ObservingYou
Hague is one of the main players who has covered up the Elite Peadophilia Ring.
He is also most likely (and has been named) as a Peadophile him self.

I agree with the OP.

There's lots of 'shuffling' happening in arliament as we speak.


I didn't realise Hague was considered a paedo by anyone!? that does come as a surprise to me, though its always surprising saddening and shocking to find out that there's people involved in these rings, I had not heard about Hague's involvement, can you offer an proof, other than the hearsay you are delivering?

I don't necessarily agree with Hague politically, but I do stand for truth and don't think well of slander.



posted on Jul, 15 2014 @ 09:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
ok lets have a reality check - primarily for those who are unfamiliar with the UK government [ the OP being the most unfamiliar in this thread so far ]

the leader of the house of commons is a cabinet appointment [ as detailed in the wikki article ] if you have an inate distrust of wikki - then use the official govt website though ifno is spread over multiple pages

further the leader MUST be an elected MP [ certain ministers can be drawn from the house of lords - or simply appointed - but the majority have a pre-requisite of being an sitting MP ]



so by the OPS " definition " - the priminister is infact "the most powerfull unelected man un great Britain " as the pre-requisites and appointment path for both PM and leader of the commons are identical

having got that out of the way - I chose to ignore the rest of the OP claims - not because I agree with them - but because thiey are unevidenced illogical rantings - and I have better things to do


You. Poo poo'd me in another thread and tried to derail me I remember! Trying to make out I was an insane person ranting about Spain winning the world cup,when it WAS CLEAR I meant the one before.

Are you a shill Mr ape?



posted on Jul, 15 2014 @ 10:54 AM
link   
a reply to: Lagrimas

nothing about your posts is clear - and as for your acusations - shove em up your ass



posted on Jul, 15 2014 @ 11:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
a reply to: Lagrimas

nothing about your posts is clear - and as for your acusations - shove em up your ass



i simply asked a question. I think it is clear what i say, when i say it, I would assume someone with the capability to think would have EASILY understood that i meant the world cup where spain DID win, four years ago!!!!!!! im sorry if it isnt obvious to you, funny how it WAS to the next person!
my previous thread where you look silly.

ill not shove anything up my ass. thanks.



posted on Jul, 15 2014 @ 11:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
ok lets have a reality check - primarily for those who are unfamiliar with the UK government [ the OP being the most unfamiliar in this thread so far ]

the leader of the house of commons is a cabinet appointment [ as detailed in the wikki article ] if you have an inate distrust of wikki - then use the official govt website though ifno is spread over multiple pages

further the leader MUST be an elected MP [ certain ministers can be drawn from the house of lords - or simply appointed - but the majority have a pre-requisite of being an sitting MP ]

so by the OPS " definition " - the priminister is infact "the most powerfull unelected man un great Britain " as the pre-requisites and appointment path for both PM and leader of the commons are identical

having got that out of the way - I chose to ignore the rest of the OP claims - not because I agree with them - but because thiey are unevidenced illogical rantings - and I have better things to do


Youre just using semantics to be pedantic. Hague was voted in as an MP. Now he has a completely different position, that he got in an unelected manner. The fact that only MP's are eligible doesnt seem beautiful and fair to me... it seems bent and favouritist/elitist.



posted on Jul, 15 2014 @ 11:18 AM
link   
a reply to: Lagrimas

ok - name one cabinet post that is elected







 
7
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join