Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2
regeneratia

What is going on with the Queen?

24 posts in this topic

Have any of you been keeping up with this?

I sure wuld like to know what you think of this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zwn2s2-oj7M

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm on dial-up. Please give me the short break down version. How long was that video anyways?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's 27 min. The title is "Kevin Annet: Brussels Trial of Pope, UK Queen for Genocide, USA Prosecution for Chemtrails". So basically a bit of everything then. The description is "Kevin Annett: Brussels trial of Pope, UK Queen for genocide. USA Prosecution for chemtrails, fraudulent financial foreclosures"

Now, this is the first I've heard of it, so i suspect this "trial" isn't actually in anything that would be recognised as a legally recognised court of law.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Thanks Admiral, that was admirable.

Edit: Happy 88th Q.E. II! :clap:

Edited by Likely Guy
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

It's 27 min. The title is "Kevin Annet: Brussels Trial of Pope, UK Queen for Genocide, USA Prosecution for Chemtrails". So basically a bit of everything then. The description is "Kevin Annett: Brussels trial of Pope, UK Queen for genocide. USA Prosecution for chemtrails, fraudulent financial foreclosures"

Now, this is the first I've heard of it, so i suspect this "trial" isn't actually in anything that would be recognised as a legally recognised court of law.

Yeah, the Flight 370 kind of smoke-screened the news on this, didn't it? How convenient that was for the Queen!

Meanwhile, the pope visited England for the first time in a long, long while. Hmmm!

That was a pretty empty synopsis, there, admiral. The accusation and prosecution is about child genocide. And likely guy applauded the killing of innocent Bristish and European children, do ya reckon? What an odd thing to applaud.

Edited by regeneratia
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Kevin D. Annett is a nutjob who thinks he's more important than he actually is.

http://rationalwiki....hurch_and_State

The "International Tribunal into Crimes of Church and State" is a one man run blog pretending to be a legal authority. Here is one of it's (his) bogus accusations;

http://www.snopes.co...opebenedict.asp

Edited by Rlyeh
4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stopped it the second I saw chemtrails

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stopped it the second I saw chemtrails

You got that far?

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You got that far?

All I saw was a wall of crazy. I couldn't stop.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay.

I watched the youtube shared by the OP.

And here is what I say:

Oi vey.

:no:

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I say pfft and so what? Doesn't amount to a hill of beans and HRH will live out her allotted span of years comfortably, as she should. She is not responsible for all the ills of the world.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

What Mr. Annet is referencing is the catholic church's complicity in the attempted genocide of the firts nations tribes of Canada and the queen visiting the pope, and of course all Canadians are subjects of the crown. Mr. Annet was very admirable (in my opinion) when he first started his crusade on behalf of the first nation but went a little nuts after the church and the Canadian government did thier best to destroy his life and reputation, now he is a bit on the fringe. But I recomend to anyone to do some research into his initial claims. Some very good revealing stuff there.

Edited by OverSword
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

What Mr. Annet is referencing is the catholic church's complicity in the attempted genocide of the firts nations tribes of Canada and the queen visiting the pope, and of course all Canadians are subjects of the crown. Mr. Annet was very admirable (in my opinion) when he first started his crusade on behalf of the first nation but went a little nuts after the church and the Canadian government did thier best to destroy his life and reputation, now he is a bit on the fringe. But I recomend to anyone to do some research into his initial claims. Some very good revealing stuff there.

The problem with Kevin Annette is he seems to be a horrendous waste of time and is of dubious character. His claims were taken seriously, but upon investigation, they fizzled out to be nothing heaped upon nothing. Not a single body was dig up where he said mass graves were, and when he in control of funds for a resident, (Lydia White Calf) he kept the money and funnelled it back to himself via his own fathers bank account. When Lydia questioned his actions, he became violent and screamed she was a Government agent sent to discredit him, which I have to say sounds all too familiar having spent much time with the nutters associated with UFOlogy. Whenever losers cannot back wild claims, they blame the Ebil Gubbermint.

Despite his claim that the 6 Nations support his allegations, their official release says very much the opposite. LINK

Recently statements have been made regarding Six Nations Elected Council (SNEC) providing

support to Kevin Annett and the International Tribunal into Crimes of Church and State (ITCCS).

SNEC became aware after the fact that SNEC ground penetrating radar (GPR) was being used at

the Woodland Cultural Centre (WCC). Six Nations Elected Council supports finding out the truth.

However, SNEC has not provided any documentation to the ITCCS, nor has SNEC confirmed any

evidence or allegations made by Mr. Annett or the ITCCS in relation to the WCC.

SNEC is in a position where it must counteract misleading information sent out by others.

In 2009, the SN Environment Office did use the GPR unit on a site for a construction project. From

a detailed analysis of the survey data, the main finding was that no anomalies resembling typical

grave sites were found.

In the fall of 2011, the Environment Office conducted GPR surveys at four locations around the

former residential school in Brantford where they were led to believe that this work was only for

locating potential graves. When the Office was led to believe that the surveys would be used as

evidence to support criminal charges related to the death of children, all work with the GPR ceased.

At no point was any information about the data was passed to ITCCS. If work was to continue,

qualified and experienced forensic GPR specialists should be hired.

Chief Montour and the Council want to make it clear that they did not speak to federal government

officials about mass graves at the Mohawk Institute. Claims that skeletal remains of children were

found in 1982 and 2008 are false. Claims that “forensic examinations” were kept secret by Council

are false. Furthermore, the federal government does not speak for SNEC nor have they provided

SNEC direction on this issue.

Again, SNEC supports the truth and, if GPR is to be used, proper protocol and procedures will be

implemented.

Not only that, but like a true religious fundie, his religion is the only one, and has outright attacked other religions, as far as going into a service and disrupting regular attendees by forcing his own special brand of BS down their throats. Which I feel IMHO makes him a hypocrite as well as a thief and liar.

He has been taken seriously, ground penetrating RADAR and excavations have cost quite a bit to follow up his genocide claims, which have been nothing more than a monumental waste of taxpayer money. Even though he makes up blatant and stupid lies, such as the Queen visiting Canada, and insisting that 6 indigenous children wash and kiss her feet, and all of whom were not seen ever again. Pffftt, yeah right. He writes ghost stories, he does not reveal anything more than a very active imagination that he forces onto others. The man is a controversial fool who incites hatred for personal gain. The world could use less Kevin Annette's in it. He is just a waste of good oxygen.

Few have heard of the Queen claim because it is a stupid "Letter of demand" by Kevin Attention Seeker Annette, not any official order or such, that which I expect was most likely and appropriately filed in the closest lavatory. It's a stupid stunt to gain attention. Lets not give it to him hey. Snake oil scumbags like this do not deserve it. They deserve no more than contempt.

Edited by psyche101
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kevin D. Annett is a nutjob who thinks he's more important than he actually is.

http://rationalwiki....hurch_and_State

The "International Tribunal into Crimes of Church and State" is a one man run blog pretending to be a legal authority. Here is one of it's (his) bogus accusations;

http://www.snopes.co...opebenedict.asp

Nice links mate, this one is worth a read too - LINK The Truth about Kevin Annett and Aboriginal Abuse

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guilty!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the only mystery is - how as this topic lasted so long in the current affairs section. :whistle: im sure it could be filed between the loch ness monster and fahrenheit 9/11 :alien:

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the only mystery is - how as this topic lasted so long in the current affairs section. :whistle: im sure it could be filed between the loch ness monster and fahrenheit 9/11 :alien:

I guess it has lasted because non-Europeans can be persuaded of all sorts of nonsense about royalty and the pope because they(the queen and the pope), are already totally ludicrous characters in the first place.

I watched the entire video. The claim was made that the pope's visit in 2010 was the first time a pope had visited England, this is not true: the previous one visited in 1982. Also, the very first pope was English ..... I just discovered that!

As for the queen handing back the Church of England to be re-absorbed into the Roman Catholic Church ruled by the pope ..... I'd like to see her try! Even if this was done 'officially', things would carry on exactly as they do now. The two churches are very different and exist to cater for two very different sets of beliefs. Can anyone seriously imagine the Irish Catholics and Irish Protestants in Northern Ireland(and elsewhere), burying the hatchet and becoming all chummy in one church? :w00t::lol: :lol: :lol:

I do believe though that there are plenty of heads of countries(current and former), who should be tried for crimes against humanity.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess it has lasted because non-Europeans can be persuaded of all sorts of nonsense about royalty and the pope because they(the queen and the pope), are already totally ludicrous characters in the first place.

I watched the entire video. The claim was made that the pope's visit in 2010 was the first time a pope had visited England, this is not true: the previous one visited in 1982. Also, the very first pope was English ..... I just discovered that!

As for the queen handing back the Church of England to be re-absorbed into the Roman Catholic Church ruled by the pope ..... I'd like to see her try! Even if this was done 'officially', things would carry on exactly as they do now. The two churches are very different and exist to cater for two very different sets of beliefs. Can anyone seriously imagine the Irish Catholics and Irish Protestants in Northern Ireland(and elsewhere), burying the hatchet and becoming all chummy in one church? :w00t::lol: :lol: :lol:

I do believe though that there are plenty of heads of countries(current and former), who should be tried for crimes against humanity.

but should the Queen, as head of state, be tried for crimes committed by "her" government as well as Tony Blair (for example)? It is a worthwhile question, rather like the position of Emperor Hirohito during WWII.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

but should the Queen, as head of state, be tried for crimes committed by "her" government as well as Tony Blair (for example)? It is a worthwhile question, rather like the position of Emperor Hirohito during WWII.

I would have thought so. Heaven knows she was in a stronger position than anybody to speak out against what was going on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

but should the Queen, as head of state, be tried for crimes committed by "her" government as well as Tony Blair (for example)? It is a worthwhile question, rather like the position of Emperor Hirohito during WWII.

I don't think so, that idiot was voted in (3 times by a large sway of this country)...I don't see why she should be held accountable for what large sways of people voted for.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think so, that idiot was voted in (3 times by a large sway of this country)...I don't see why she should be held accountable for what large sways of people voted for.

And this is exactly why our political system doesn't work! People misguidedly vote for a party(choice of two), because they are promised something by that party. Said party gets into power and totally ignores voting public and promises made. Great swathes of people did NOT vote for this country to go to war with Iraq(or Afghanistan) ..... quite the opposite in fact, thousands of people walked to Westminster to protest against it! I live in the far south west and people walked from here. Going to war should be something that everyone gets to vote on. All big single issues should be voted on. It is absolutely mindbogglingly crazy that ONE MAN, Tony Bleh was able to take that decision. The queen should have taken notice of what her subjects wanted and acted accordingly against her government.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And this is exactly why our political system doesn't work! People misguidedly vote for a party(choice of two), because they are promised something by that party. Said party gets into power and totally ignores voting public and promises made. Great swathes of people did NOT vote for this country to go to war with Iraq(or Afghanistan) ..... quite the opposite in fact, thousands of people walked to Westminster to protest against it! I live in the far south west and people walked from here. Going to war should be something that everyone gets to vote on. All big single issues should be voted on. It is absolutely mindbogglingly crazy that ONE MAN, Tony Bleh was able to take that decision. The queen should have taken notice of what her subjects wanted and acted accordingly against her government.

Less then 2% of the population isn't 'great swathes' of anything (and 2% is a generous figure). He lied to take us to war, and was voted in again, simply because he kept money in the pockets of those who voted for him by his disastrous policies of bankrupting the country, and allowing mass debt to be accumilated. When people have more money in their pockets war becomes a side issue. If the people of this country had really been against it at the time of the vote then tens of millions would have taken to the streets - they didn't. For the queen to step in, over rule parliament and side step our political system in favour of the opinions of less then 2% of the country is a bizarre notion...and even more bizarre is the notion she should be held accountable for his actions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

And this is exactly why our political system doesn't work! People misguidedly vote for a party(choice of two), because they are promised something by that party. Said party gets into power and totally ignores voting public and promises made. Great swathes of people did NOT vote for this country to go to war with Iraq(or Afghanistan) ..... quite the opposite in fact, thousands of people walked to Westminster to protest against it! I live in the far south west and people walked from here. Going to war should be something that everyone gets to vote on. All big single issues should be voted on. It is absolutely mindbogglingly crazy that ONE MAN, Tony Bleh was able to take that decision. The queen should have taken notice of what her subjects wanted and acted accordingly against her government.

What really bothers me is that people cannot put two and two together here, much less find four from it.

Correct me if I am wrong, but hasn't there been a huge crack down on the pedaphile activity, with cases that have seriouosly affected some prominent families in Britain. Here in the USA, we have had some serious pedaphile activity even in high levels of Washington, DC, linking to orphanages and abducted children. I am not saying Britain is unique in this. And I have no real political beef against monarchy. I just have "great expectations" that people live upright and honest, LOVING lives, regardless of the country they live in.

I have no idea what is going on. But thanks all for the discussion. I learned alot, maybe not the things you would expect.

Let's dispell Wetiko!!

Edited by regeneratia

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Less then 2% of the population isn't 'great swathes' of anything (and 2% is a generous figure). He lied to take us to war, and was voted in again, simply because he kept money in the pockets of those who voted for him by his disastrous policies of bankrupting the country, and allowing mass debt to be accumilated. When people have more money in their pockets war becomes a side issue. If the people of this country had really been against it at the time of the vote then tens of millions would have taken to the streets - they didn't. For the queen to step in, over rule parliament and side step our political system in favour of the opinions of less then 2% of the country is a bizarre notion...and even more bizarre is the notion she should be held accountable for his actions.

Of topic, but Bush never won a presidential election.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.