Forwarded from Tree Of Logic - Treehouse News
This media is not supported in your browser
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
Imam Tawhidi, better known as the Imam of Peace: “The West have imported the garbage of the Muslim world who don’t want to work, and they are destroying you”
Forwarded from 𝗢𝗳𝗳-𝗚𝗿𝗶𝗱 𝗜𝗿𝗲𝗹𝗮𝗻𝗱 ☘️ (Gabhán)
Silencing the Lambs. How Propaganda Works
Strategic Culture Foundation (RSS)
By John PILGER
In the 1970s, I met one of Hitler’s leading propagandists, Leni Riefenstahl, whose epic films glorified the Nazis. We happened to be staying at the same lodge in Kenya, where she was on a photography assignment, having escaped the fate of other friends of the Fuhrer.
She told me that the ‘patriotic messages’ of her films were dependent not on ‘orders from above’ but on what she called the ‘submissive void’ of the German public.
Did that include the liberal, educated bourgeoisie? I asked. ‘Yes, especially them,’ she said.
I think of this as I look around at the propaganda now consuming Western societies.
Of course, we are very different from Germany in the 1930s. We l...
View original post
Join @OffgridiIreland ☘️
Strategic Culture Foundation (RSS)
By John PILGER
In the 1970s, I met one of Hitler’s leading propagandists, Leni Riefenstahl, whose epic films glorified the Nazis. We happened to be staying at the same lodge in Kenya, where she was on a photography assignment, having escaped the fate of other friends of the Fuhrer.
She told me that the ‘patriotic messages’ of her films were dependent not on ‘orders from above’ but on what she called the ‘submissive void’ of the German public.
Did that include the liberal, educated bourgeoisie? I asked. ‘Yes, especially them,’ she said.
I think of this as I look around at the propaganda now consuming Western societies.
Of course, we are very different from Germany in the 1930s. We l...
View original post
Join @OffgridiIreland ☘️
WIZARDS OF WISDOM pinned «Watch "Atlantis: An Empire Lost and Found - Full Documentary" on YouTube https://youtu.be/2XHNzn_2Iog»
Forwarded from Jim Corr News
Open Borders Ireland Drives Record Population Growth https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2022/08/25/open-borders-ireland-120000-strong-migrant-surge-drives-record-population-growth/
Breitbart
Open Borders Ireland: 120,000 Migrant Surge Drives Record Pop Growth
A surge in the number of migrants entering Ireland has resulted in it seeing its highest population growth since the 2008 banking crash.
WIZARDS OF WISDOM pinned «Open Borders Ireland Drives Record Population Growth https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2022/08/25/open-borders-ireland-120000-strong-migrant-surge-drives-record-population-growth/»
Forwarded from Late Stage Ireland
Media is too big
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
250 Modular homes being built in Citywest.
All they're missing is a little sign in the windows reading:
No Blacks
No Dogs
No Irish ✅
🔗 tiktok.com
All they're missing is a little sign in the windows reading:
No Dogs
🔗 tiktok.com
Forwarded from Littlebit Sunshine
CASHLESS AND THE EU
I have seen over the last few weeks various posts with regard to the growing phenomena of places of business or even State Entities refusing to accept cash payments and to be blunt various nonsensical “solutions” being offered or opined or promulgated by different people as to how to address this.
This “issue” HAS been addressed and in the ONLY place that actually matters, The European Court of Justice, for one reason and one reason only it is the EU that sets out the “rules” for “Economic and monetary policy” and that INCLUDES what may or may not be determined to be “legal tender”
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Grand Chamber) 26 January 2021*
(Reference for a preliminary ruling – Economic and monetary policy – Article 2(1) and Article 3(1)(c) TFEU – Monetary policy – Exclusive competence of the European Union – Article 128(1) TFEU – Protocol (No 4) on the Statute of the European System of Central Banks and of the European Central Bank – Article 16, first paragraph – Concept of ‘legal tender’ – Effects – Obligation to accept euro banknotes – Regulation (EC) No 974/98 –
Whether possible for Member States to impose limitations on payments by means of banknotes and coins denominated in euro – Conditions – Regional legislation precluding the payment in cash of a radio and television licence fee to a regional public broadcasting body)
In Joined Cases C-422/19 and C-423/19,
REQUESTS for a preliminary ruling under Article 267 TFEU from the Bundesverwaltungsgericht (Federal Administrative Court, Germany), made by decisions of 27 March 2019, received at the Court on 31 May 2019, in the proceeding.
THIS IS THE LAW – EUROPEAN LAW
“European Union law
The Protocol on the ESCB and the ECB
3 The first paragraph of Article 16 of the Protocol on the ESCB and the ECB is worded as follows:
‘In accordance with Article 128(1) of the [FEU Treaty], the Governing Council shall have the exclusive right to authorise the issue of euro banknotes within the Union. The [European Central Bank (ECB)] and the national central banks may issue such notes. The banknotes issued by the ECB and the national central banks shall be the only such notes to have the status of legal tender within the Union.’
Regulation No 974/98
4 Recital 19 of Regulation No 974/98 reads as follows:
‘Whereas banknotes and coins denominated in the national currency units lose their status of legal tender at the latest six months after the end of the transitional period; whereas limitations on payments in notes and coins, established by Member States for public reasons, are not incompatible with the status of legal tender of euro banknotes and coins, provided that other lawful means for the settlement of monetary debts are available’
Ok – an ECJ Ruling always sets out the relevant Law first and then addresses the circumstances of the matter before it gets into the nitty gritty – I won’t go into all the ins and outs of this Ruling, you can read through it yourselves to get the gist.
Though be warned – the Court in THIS one ties itself into a few knots – and it makes for hard going – anyhoo it sets out this first:
“Where a payment obligation exists, the legal tender of euro banknotes and coins should imply:
(a) Mandatory acceptance:
The creditor of a payment obligation cannot refuse euro banknotes and coins unless the parties have agreed on other means of payment.
(b) Acceptance at full face value:
The monetary value of euro banknotes and coins is equal to the amount indicated on the banknotes and coins.
(c) Power to discharge from payment obligations:
A debtor can discharge himself from a payment obligation by tendering euro banknotes and coins to the creditor.
2. Acceptance of payments in euro banknotes and coins in retail transactions
The acceptance of euro banknotes and coins as means of payments in retail transactions should be the rule. A refusal thereof should be possible only if grounded on reasons related to the “good faith principle” (for example the retailer has no change available).”
I have seen over the last few weeks various posts with regard to the growing phenomena of places of business or even State Entities refusing to accept cash payments and to be blunt various nonsensical “solutions” being offered or opined or promulgated by different people as to how to address this.
This “issue” HAS been addressed and in the ONLY place that actually matters, The European Court of Justice, for one reason and one reason only it is the EU that sets out the “rules” for “Economic and monetary policy” and that INCLUDES what may or may not be determined to be “legal tender”
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Grand Chamber) 26 January 2021*
(Reference for a preliminary ruling – Economic and monetary policy – Article 2(1) and Article 3(1)(c) TFEU – Monetary policy – Exclusive competence of the European Union – Article 128(1) TFEU – Protocol (No 4) on the Statute of the European System of Central Banks and of the European Central Bank – Article 16, first paragraph – Concept of ‘legal tender’ – Effects – Obligation to accept euro banknotes – Regulation (EC) No 974/98 –
Whether possible for Member States to impose limitations on payments by means of banknotes and coins denominated in euro – Conditions – Regional legislation precluding the payment in cash of a radio and television licence fee to a regional public broadcasting body)
In Joined Cases C-422/19 and C-423/19,
REQUESTS for a preliminary ruling under Article 267 TFEU from the Bundesverwaltungsgericht (Federal Administrative Court, Germany), made by decisions of 27 March 2019, received at the Court on 31 May 2019, in the proceeding.
THIS IS THE LAW – EUROPEAN LAW
“European Union law
The Protocol on the ESCB and the ECB
3 The first paragraph of Article 16 of the Protocol on the ESCB and the ECB is worded as follows:
‘In accordance with Article 128(1) of the [FEU Treaty], the Governing Council shall have the exclusive right to authorise the issue of euro banknotes within the Union. The [European Central Bank (ECB)] and the national central banks may issue such notes. The banknotes issued by the ECB and the national central banks shall be the only such notes to have the status of legal tender within the Union.’
Regulation No 974/98
4 Recital 19 of Regulation No 974/98 reads as follows:
‘Whereas banknotes and coins denominated in the national currency units lose their status of legal tender at the latest six months after the end of the transitional period; whereas limitations on payments in notes and coins, established by Member States for public reasons, are not incompatible with the status of legal tender of euro banknotes and coins, provided that other lawful means for the settlement of monetary debts are available’
Ok – an ECJ Ruling always sets out the relevant Law first and then addresses the circumstances of the matter before it gets into the nitty gritty – I won’t go into all the ins and outs of this Ruling, you can read through it yourselves to get the gist.
Though be warned – the Court in THIS one ties itself into a few knots – and it makes for hard going – anyhoo it sets out this first:
“Where a payment obligation exists, the legal tender of euro banknotes and coins should imply:
(a) Mandatory acceptance:
The creditor of a payment obligation cannot refuse euro banknotes and coins unless the parties have agreed on other means of payment.
(b) Acceptance at full face value:
The monetary value of euro banknotes and coins is equal to the amount indicated on the banknotes and coins.
(c) Power to discharge from payment obligations:
A debtor can discharge himself from a payment obligation by tendering euro banknotes and coins to the creditor.
2. Acceptance of payments in euro banknotes and coins in retail transactions
The acceptance of euro banknotes and coins as means of payments in retail transactions should be the rule. A refusal thereof should be possible only if grounded on reasons related to the “good faith principle” (for example the retailer has no change available).”
Forwarded from Littlebit Sunshine
It is No 2 that you need take of and keep in mind. Moving on.
Public Authorities
“15 Mr Dietrich and Mr Häring, who own dwellings within the geographical area covered by Hessischer Rundfunk, offered to pay the radio and television licence fee due pursuant to Paragraph 2(1) of the RBStV for the second quarter of 2015 and the first quarter of 2016, respectively, in cash”
As you can see Mr. Dietrich and Mr Haring wanted to pay their television licence fees in cash and the “public authority” tasked with collecting those fees made a song and dance about it and gave them no option to do that – the Court Ruled that:
“32 In those circumstances, the answer to the first question referred for a preliminary ruling must start from the premiss that the second sentence of Paragraph 14(1) of the BBankG obliges public authorities to accept euro banknotes in fulfilment of statutorily imposed payment obligations.”
Ok – the Court confined itself to the question of whether the National Authority could oblige EVERYBODY to pay for their TV in several different ways but EXCLUDE payment in cash – the point was raised that:
“72 As regards the reasons of public interest relied on to justify the exclusion, under the legislation at issue in the main proceedings, of cash payments of the radio and television licence fee, it should be noted that Hessischer Rundfunk stated in its written observations that, given the fact that there are approximately 46 million licence fee payers in Germany, the obligation to pay the radio and television licence fee by cashless means of payment is intended to ensure the effective recovery of the licence fee and to avoid substantial additional costs”
But, further on made this point
“78 It follows from the foregoing that the answer to the second question is that the third sentence of Article 128(1) TFEU, the third sentence of the first paragraph of Article 16 of the Protocol on the ESCB and the ECB, and the second sentence of Article 10 of Regulation No 974/98 must be interpreted as not precluding national legislation which excludes the possibility of discharging a statutorily imposed payment obligation in banknotes denominated in euro, provided (i) that that legislation does not have the object or effect of establishing legal rules governing the status of legal tender of such banknotes; (ii) that it does not lead, in law or in fact, to abolition of those banknotes, in particular by calling into question the possibility, as a general rule, of discharging a payment obligation in cash; (iii) that it has been adopted for reasons of public interest; (iv) that the limitation on payments in cash which the legislation entails is appropriate for attaining the public interest objective pursued; and (v) that it does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve that objective, in that other lawful means of discharging the payment obligation are available”
In plain English – yep – to collect this fee, you CAN set up or require people to have Direct Debits or whatever but you CANNOT refuse the actual LEGAL TENDER of the EU – or make “Rules” in such a way;
“(ii) that it does not lead, in law or in fact, to abolition of those banknotes, in particular by calling into question the possibility, as a general rule, of discharging a payment obligation in cash;”
This is AFFIRMED in the final paragraph – that CASH is LEGAL TENDER – that while Public Authorities can have a system whereby those who can or want to can pay by electronic means they CANNOT refuse LEGAL TENDER OR MAKE RULES that exclude the possibility of paying with LEGAL TENDER – i.e., = CASH
Public Authorities
“15 Mr Dietrich and Mr Häring, who own dwellings within the geographical area covered by Hessischer Rundfunk, offered to pay the radio and television licence fee due pursuant to Paragraph 2(1) of the RBStV for the second quarter of 2015 and the first quarter of 2016, respectively, in cash”
As you can see Mr. Dietrich and Mr Haring wanted to pay their television licence fees in cash and the “public authority” tasked with collecting those fees made a song and dance about it and gave them no option to do that – the Court Ruled that:
“32 In those circumstances, the answer to the first question referred for a preliminary ruling must start from the premiss that the second sentence of Paragraph 14(1) of the BBankG obliges public authorities to accept euro banknotes in fulfilment of statutorily imposed payment obligations.”
Ok – the Court confined itself to the question of whether the National Authority could oblige EVERYBODY to pay for their TV in several different ways but EXCLUDE payment in cash – the point was raised that:
“72 As regards the reasons of public interest relied on to justify the exclusion, under the legislation at issue in the main proceedings, of cash payments of the radio and television licence fee, it should be noted that Hessischer Rundfunk stated in its written observations that, given the fact that there are approximately 46 million licence fee payers in Germany, the obligation to pay the radio and television licence fee by cashless means of payment is intended to ensure the effective recovery of the licence fee and to avoid substantial additional costs”
But, further on made this point
“78 It follows from the foregoing that the answer to the second question is that the third sentence of Article 128(1) TFEU, the third sentence of the first paragraph of Article 16 of the Protocol on the ESCB and the ECB, and the second sentence of Article 10 of Regulation No 974/98 must be interpreted as not precluding national legislation which excludes the possibility of discharging a statutorily imposed payment obligation in banknotes denominated in euro, provided (i) that that legislation does not have the object or effect of establishing legal rules governing the status of legal tender of such banknotes; (ii) that it does not lead, in law or in fact, to abolition of those banknotes, in particular by calling into question the possibility, as a general rule, of discharging a payment obligation in cash; (iii) that it has been adopted for reasons of public interest; (iv) that the limitation on payments in cash which the legislation entails is appropriate for attaining the public interest objective pursued; and (v) that it does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve that objective, in that other lawful means of discharging the payment obligation are available”
In plain English – yep – to collect this fee, you CAN set up or require people to have Direct Debits or whatever but you CANNOT refuse the actual LEGAL TENDER of the EU – or make “Rules” in such a way;
“(ii) that it does not lead, in law or in fact, to abolition of those banknotes, in particular by calling into question the possibility, as a general rule, of discharging a payment obligation in cash;”
This is AFFIRMED in the final paragraph – that CASH is LEGAL TENDER – that while Public Authorities can have a system whereby those who can or want to can pay by electronic means they CANNOT refuse LEGAL TENDER OR MAKE RULES that exclude the possibility of paying with LEGAL TENDER – i.e., = CASH
Forwarded from Littlebit Sunshine
“The third sentence of Article 128(1) TFEU, the third sentence of the first paragraph of Article 16 of Protocol (No 4) on the Statute of the European System of Central Banks and of the European Central Bank, and the second sentence of Article 10 of Council Regulation (EC) No 974/98 of 3 May 1998 on the introduction of the euro must be interpreted as not precluding national legislation which excludes the possibility of discharging a statutorily imposed payment obligation in banknotes denominated in euro, provided
(i) that that legislation does not have the object or effect of establishing legal rules governing the status of legal tender of such banknotes;
(ii) that it does not lead, in law or in fact, to abolition of those banknotes, in particular by calling into question the possibility, as a general rule, of discharging a payment obligation in cash;
(iii) that it has been adopted for reasons of public interest; (iv) that the limitation on payments in cash which the legislation entails is appropriate for attaining the public interest objective pursued; and (v) that it does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve that objective, in that other lawful means of discharging the payment obligation are available”
Joined Cases C-422/19 and C-423/19, Johannes Dietrich (C-422/19), Norbert Häring (C-423/19)
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:62019CJ0422&from=EN
How does this help?
It establishes that CASH is LEGAL TENDER within the EU – but lets go back to the Preliminary Ruling of the Advocate General.
From the original PRELIMINARY Opinion of Advocate General’s Opinion in Joined Cases C-422/19 - Johannes Dietrich and C-423/19 Norbert Häring v Hessischer Rundfunk. The above is the Grand Chamber Judgement – which is narrower in focus and confines itself to addressing payments to Public Authorities.
“According to Advocate General Pitruzzella, EU law provides that creditors have an obligation in principle to accept cash in euros for the payment of monetary debts
The European Union and the Member States can, however, in exercising powers other than those relating to monetary policy, impose, under specific conditions, limits on the use of euro banknotes as a means of payment, in order to pursue public interest objectives”
“The Advocate General also notes that although the European Union does not provide for an absolute right to payment in cash in all cases, a direct link between the value of legal tender attributed to cash and the exercise of fundamental rights may exist in cases where there is a social inclusion element to the use of cash. The use of money other than in its physical form (namely, cash) currently requires the use of basic financial services, to which a not insignificant number of people do not yet have access. For those vulnerable individuals, cash is the only form of accessible money and thus the only means of exercising their fundamental rights linked to the use of money. Measures restricting the use of cash as a means of payment should, therefore, take into account the social inclusion element of cash as a means of payment for those vulnerable people and should ensure the effective existence of other lawful means for the settlement of monetary debts. The Advocate General considers that there is an obligation to take appropriate measures to enable vulnerable people who do not have access to basic financial services to discharge their obligations, particularly those of a public nature, without additional costs.”
AS you can see, Advocate General Pitruzzella took a broader view of the issue – in this Preliminary hearing he DID “open the door” so to speak to a means of addressing the wider issue of Rights with regard to being entitled to pay with cash as
(i) that that legislation does not have the object or effect of establishing legal rules governing the status of legal tender of such banknotes;
(ii) that it does not lead, in law or in fact, to abolition of those banknotes, in particular by calling into question the possibility, as a general rule, of discharging a payment obligation in cash;
(iii) that it has been adopted for reasons of public interest; (iv) that the limitation on payments in cash which the legislation entails is appropriate for attaining the public interest objective pursued; and (v) that it does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve that objective, in that other lawful means of discharging the payment obligation are available”
Joined Cases C-422/19 and C-423/19, Johannes Dietrich (C-422/19), Norbert Häring (C-423/19)
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:62019CJ0422&from=EN
How does this help?
It establishes that CASH is LEGAL TENDER within the EU – but lets go back to the Preliminary Ruling of the Advocate General.
From the original PRELIMINARY Opinion of Advocate General’s Opinion in Joined Cases C-422/19 - Johannes Dietrich and C-423/19 Norbert Häring v Hessischer Rundfunk. The above is the Grand Chamber Judgement – which is narrower in focus and confines itself to addressing payments to Public Authorities.
“According to Advocate General Pitruzzella, EU law provides that creditors have an obligation in principle to accept cash in euros for the payment of monetary debts
The European Union and the Member States can, however, in exercising powers other than those relating to monetary policy, impose, under specific conditions, limits on the use of euro banknotes as a means of payment, in order to pursue public interest objectives”
“The Advocate General also notes that although the European Union does not provide for an absolute right to payment in cash in all cases, a direct link between the value of legal tender attributed to cash and the exercise of fundamental rights may exist in cases where there is a social inclusion element to the use of cash. The use of money other than in its physical form (namely, cash) currently requires the use of basic financial services, to which a not insignificant number of people do not yet have access. For those vulnerable individuals, cash is the only form of accessible money and thus the only means of exercising their fundamental rights linked to the use of money. Measures restricting the use of cash as a means of payment should, therefore, take into account the social inclusion element of cash as a means of payment for those vulnerable people and should ensure the effective existence of other lawful means for the settlement of monetary debts. The Advocate General considers that there is an obligation to take appropriate measures to enable vulnerable people who do not have access to basic financial services to discharge their obligations, particularly those of a public nature, without additional costs.”
AS you can see, Advocate General Pitruzzella took a broader view of the issue – in this Preliminary hearing he DID “open the door” so to speak to a means of addressing the wider issue of Rights with regard to being entitled to pay with cash as
Forwarded from Littlebit Sunshine
“…….the only form of accessible money and thus the only means of exercising their fundamental rights linked to the use of money. Measures restricting the use of cash as a means of payment should, therefore, take into account the social inclusion element of cash as a means of payment for those vulnerable people and should ensure the effective existence of other lawful means for the settlement of monetary debts.”
It is unsurprising the Grand Chamber took a narrower view but, having said that it AFFIRMED that CASH is legal tender in the EU and that people are entitled to pay their debts/bills/creditors in CASH.
FINALLY, it helps because I have heard of people being told that “it’s the law” when refusing to accept cash for goods and services – actually NO it isn’t!
It would require ANOTHER Ruling from the ECJ to sort out the refusal of cash in places other than Public Authorities – who wants to go first?
And bear in mind the two German Lads started their EU case back in 2019 and this was after that they started and had been through their “domestic courts” and “exhausted all domestic remedies” starting in 2015
“Mr Dietrich and Mr Häring, who own dwellings within the geographical area covered by Hessischer Rundfunk, offered to pay the radio and television licence fee due pursuant to Paragraph 2(1) of the RBStV for the second quarter of 2015 and the first quarter of 2016, respectively, in cash”
Court of Justice of the European Union - PRESS RELEASE No 119/20 - Luxembourg, 29 September 2020
Advocate General’s Opinion in Joined Cases C-422/19 - Johannes Dietrich and C-423/19 Norbert Häring v Hessischer Rundfunk
https://norberthaering.de/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Advocate-General.pdf
It is unsurprising the Grand Chamber took a narrower view but, having said that it AFFIRMED that CASH is legal tender in the EU and that people are entitled to pay their debts/bills/creditors in CASH.
FINALLY, it helps because I have heard of people being told that “it’s the law” when refusing to accept cash for goods and services – actually NO it isn’t!
It would require ANOTHER Ruling from the ECJ to sort out the refusal of cash in places other than Public Authorities – who wants to go first?
And bear in mind the two German Lads started their EU case back in 2019 and this was after that they started and had been through their “domestic courts” and “exhausted all domestic remedies” starting in 2015
“Mr Dietrich and Mr Häring, who own dwellings within the geographical area covered by Hessischer Rundfunk, offered to pay the radio and television licence fee due pursuant to Paragraph 2(1) of the RBStV for the second quarter of 2015 and the first quarter of 2016, respectively, in cash”
Court of Justice of the European Union - PRESS RELEASE No 119/20 - Luxembourg, 29 September 2020
Advocate General’s Opinion in Joined Cases C-422/19 - Johannes Dietrich and C-423/19 Norbert Häring v Hessischer Rundfunk
https://norberthaering.de/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Advocate-General.pdf
Forwarded from éıꞃe is ( falling). Rising Main channel
The 1922 Proclamation that was the call to arms for Irishmen to stand against the Treaty in defence of the Irish Republic.
"Rory handed me the printed proclamation which he had helped to write: ‘To the Citizens of Dublin’. It now adorned the dead wall spaces and the pillar boxes of the city. ‘The situation is well in hand,’ he said, and laughed. Then he quoted Macaulay:
And how can man die better than facing fearful odds For the ashes of his fathers, and the temples of his gods?
He usually said those lines of Horatius when anything went wrong, in a bantering way, but often before he had finished the smile had gone. He sat there, his face becoming set as he finished. There was silence under the dome." (Singing Flame, Ernie O'Malley)
"Rory handed me the printed proclamation which he had helped to write: ‘To the Citizens of Dublin’. It now adorned the dead wall spaces and the pillar boxes of the city. ‘The situation is well in hand,’ he said, and laughed. Then he quoted Macaulay:
And how can man die better than facing fearful odds For the ashes of his fathers, and the temples of his gods?
He usually said those lines of Horatius when anything went wrong, in a bantering way, but often before he had finished the smile had gone. He sat there, his face becoming set as he finished. There was silence under the dome." (Singing Flame, Ernie O'Malley)
Forwarded from Jeni
Watch "The bizarre “white privilege” exercises recommended in Irish schools | Gript" on YouTube
https://youtu.be/mZz6v6Rp9yw
https://youtu.be/mZz6v6Rp9yw
YouTube
The bizarre “white privilege” exercises recommended in Irish schools | Gript
BEN SCALLAN: Ireland’s curriculum body advised teachers to hold classroom exercises dividing children along class & racial lines, based on questions about ones’ race, household income, whether they were sexually abused by a family member, & more.
Donate…
Donate…
Forwarded from JRD
JRD (Twitter)
RT @243_cal: 91,100 non-nationals arrived in Ireland in 12 months to Apr 2022
Highest since 2007 EU expansion influx
That's more than 3 times the natural increase of 27,700 in same year
With "We just need to build more houses!" idiocy we're only bailing out a sinking ship
#IrelandisFull https://twitter.com/243_cal/status/1562860220727971840/photo/1
RT @243_cal: 91,100 non-nationals arrived in Ireland in 12 months to Apr 2022
Highest since 2007 EU expansion influx
That's more than 3 times the natural increase of 27,700 in same year
With "We just need to build more houses!" idiocy we're only bailing out a sinking ship
#IrelandisFull https://twitter.com/243_cal/status/1562860220727971840/photo/1
Forwarded from DMPatriot • NEWS 🗞 (BellaXinda)
Media is too big
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
United Nations plan for the 21st Century known as Agenda 21. It was agreed upon by 179 nations in 1992. The year Bill Clinton was elected office. It's a Toltalitarian state where everything is controlled. Even you.
The goal of Agenda 21 is a one world government. It's plan is to move people into large cities from rural areas. Everything you see happening right now is occurring to fulfill this plan. Everything from land, food material production, medicine, health care, depopulation are all part of the plan.
Please listen to this video and when a friend or family member ask why everything seems off balance and doesn't make sense, give this to them to help than understand. Sustainability sounds wonderful. But it has a very dark side. Video approximately 7 minutes.
Join & Share👇
@DMPatriot17 ⚖️
The goal of Agenda 21 is a one world government. It's plan is to move people into large cities from rural areas. Everything you see happening right now is occurring to fulfill this plan. Everything from land, food material production, medicine, health care, depopulation are all part of the plan.
Please listen to this video and when a friend or family member ask why everything seems off balance and doesn't make sense, give this to them to help than understand. Sustainability sounds wonderful. But it has a very dark side. Video approximately 7 minutes.
Join & Share👇
@DMPatriot17 ⚖️
Forwarded from Tommy Robinson News
This media is not supported in your browser
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
Mysterious fiber clots are being found the dead, embalmers are reporting that they’re being found in 50% to 70% of the recently deceased 👀