The Chill About Children

…by Joska Ramelow


PC, Common Purpose, Cecil Rhodes, the Empire striking there and back, dominating public opinion and child abuse, is Rotherham the game changer?

During a recent interview with guest David Icke on Red Ice Radio about the Rotherham child abuse scandal I wondered about a large chunk of time of the debate given over to questions of multiculturalism and the and a perceived confusion within our different ethnic communities. This apparently is rife in many European countries too. I tend to agree with David’s view, shared by many others, that these are just symptoms of a larger globalist agenda. This merits it’s own special place in the patchwork of multi factorial stress factors that are superimposed on our every day lives. Looking at it we see shapes of an unspoken ‘agenda’ that seems to provide tools to the local administrators and academics alike, who can sign up to these courses in order to up their points score on their career portfolios. These tools are mental in nature and, thus, are based on the most successful linguistic handling of local problems in the most convincing and smooth manner. These are then applied under training programs the most recent of which goes by the name of ‘Common Purpose (CP)’ and a little further back in time we had ‘Neuro Linguistic programming’. CP is a more political oriented training for executives and administrators in local Government to verbally handle any problem thrown at them and show the right ‘leadership’ skills to take the ‘initiative’ and settle potential flashpoints in the public arena. These kind of programs are offered within various authorities and public services such as the judiciary, the social services, the health services and, of course, the media to name but a few. Wherever there is a constant direct contact with the citizenry on the cards these programs of providing practical handles to the executive are never far away. All members of these public service industries are invited to join courses, mostly paid for out of taxpayers pockets. We have seen it with the implementations of Agenda 21, which many councils have signed up to by now. It is sold as a package of smart, green, and more service friendly set of measures for a ‘sustainable future’ to an unsuspecting public. However, the downside is that the United Nations are eager sponsors of such non-binding legal propositions and undertakes everything in their power to make it stick right on our doorstep. The bottom line is a rather secret agenda of a corporate nature that reaps the benefits for the ‘implementers’ rather than the citizenry.

The story of the humble incandescent light bulb

One example might suffice to highlight the skewered nature of this ‘wolf dressed up as lamb’ agenda. Council X, such as mine in real terms, declares a ward an ‘environmental protected sustainable zone’ or whatever else the most up to date slogan may fit the bill of the day. This is sold to the citizenry as very good for them, since it will ensure to protect the character of their neighbourhoods and a number of other advantages into the deal, everyone would harmoniously agree to. Who in their right mind would not agree to avoid the prospect of having bulldozers constantly fill the air with npise and dust whilst flattening your neighbourhood for the erection of new shopping malls. No one in their right mind would agree to having a naturally grown character of a relaxing neighbourhood defaced and with it the quality of life. It is the councils duty to maintain a peaceful environment that optimally provides much needed rest and recovery fro every dweller in large cities for example. However, my council X, having adopted these sustainable good looking measures, may one fine day pass further regulations that forces all citizenry within the boundaries of this protected area that from a certain date onward they to comply with the use of new energy efficient light bulbs, since sustainable also means protecting the environment from emission of greenhouse gasses. From then on you are being forced to buy one product line only in the form of energy saving bulbs. Initially they sounded a very good idea, since the people in Brussels told us as much, after they passed the ‘directives’. We just do not know that there have never been any real tests to substantiate this claim. But it gets even better. It did not take long for critically enquiring minds to realise that these bulbs bring into our homes the most hazardous and toxic materials to our health in the form of mercury. Some may say ‘oh, but this is only a negligible amount’….that would be a very generous statement on our behalf, since the few hundred milligrams each bulb contains is able to contaminate 5000 gallons of drinking water. The global community has known for decades what happened when mercury escaped into the sea water in Minamata bay in Japan and left countless children damaged for life with severe neurological debilities. The Corporate perpetrators had no better thing to do than to use the local newspapers to vilify the victims as unfriendly obstreperous members of society, and drag their feet in the courts for compensation claims that are still unsettled some 40+ years later. The first cases of children suffering the consequences of a broken energy saving light bulb in their bedroom have already gone through the courts and the media in Germany a couple of years ago. The specialist therapy of detoxification and chelation of mercury from this toddler boys nervous system took a lengthy period of months after his hair had mysteriously dropped out over night. The parents first had to overcome their disbelief that it was a broken energy light bulb that had caused it.


Energy saving lamps contain mercury, a substance which is extremely harmful for humans, animals and the ecosystem in general. It is especially toxic to the brain, the nervous system, the liver and the kidneys. Foetuses, babies and infants are the most vulnerable, as mercury exposure negatively influences the development of the brain (e.g. lower IQ)and nervous system. Mercury can also damage the cardiovascular, immune and reproductive systems and possibly lead to tremors, emotional instability, memory loss, insomnia, neuromuscular changes, headaches, cancer and Alzheimer’s (7).

It is often said that energy saving lamps contain only a very small amount of mercury, which therefore can’t be harmful. Though one has to ask the question: small in comparison to what? The safe intake of mercury for a human body is a only a few micrograms (8). CFL’s contain three to five thousand micrograms.

Taken from:

    1. Fact sheet: the three main health risks associated with energy saving lamps (CFCs)

In this one example it reveals how Common Purpose(CP) and Agenda 21 and Neuro Linguistic Programming all work hand in hand to not only masterly champion ‘the protection our environment ‘and living spaces for a ‘sustainable future’, but it squares the circle in one fell swoop by implementing regulations that take free choice away from the consumer to force us into solutions that make our homes more hazardous to live in. The energy saving light bulb is technically speaking a type of hazardous waste for which stringent safety regulations should be in place. By declaring the old light bulb illegal and entire neighbourhoods sustainable, the flood gates are opened little by little which is also proven by the fact that the United Nations have set up various permanent working groups that divide into different areas of expertise to implement Agenda 21. The same goes for something known as ‘Codex Alimentarius’ for which the UN has established 27 working groups since the 1950’s and little by little they are doing their work year on year to implement it’s rulings locally. This is the reason why there are ever more pressures piled up against the use of herbal medicine and vitamins by the public at large. It might be of interest to note that this piece of legislation was penned by no other than the convicted war criminal Fritz Ter-Mer, who was sentenced during the Nuremberg Trials for his role as a high ranking executive for IG Farben in the Auschwitz industrial complex which used concentration camp labour to keep the German war effort going. We have to be cognisant of the fact that most of the laws in the EU and recommendations coming from the UN for implementation are nowadays heavily influenced by lobby groups from industry since this has been a fact for decades now. This applies to all areas of industry. We see it with the various lobby groups who work hard on behalf of the food industry in their efforts to successively force a relaxation of health restrictions in our foods, or the pharmaceutical industry doing the same on their behalf. We are well advised to always look at the, ‘Qui bono’. ‘who benefits’ question in the long term.

Their ‘best practise’ is to constantly lavish the public with reams of a conflicting and bewildering streams of infomercials, sometimes dressed up as a ‘plain English campaign’, then as ‘scientifically proven’ and at others even in gleaming high tech jargon, whatever fits best. The trick , however, is to constantly repeat the same message whatever is being presented to an ever more disinterested and weary public. Even this aspect of having been numbed into compliance could be seen as a strategic goal by the interested parties. Mussolini comes to mind who famously said that ‘when the corporations and politics serve the same ends. we have perfect fascism..’. The number one Propaganda enforcer of Nazi Germany, Mr. Goebbels, (Gobbledegook?) said ‘if a lie is repeated often enough, however dumb it , it will be perceived as the truth in the end ‘….

One should not forget that the machinations of mass psychology had been turning those wheels then and still do it now which is where the likes of tools such as Neuro Linguistic Programming are applied.

The champions of the day back then were writers like Gustave Le Bon with his book:

The Crowd: A Study of the Popular Mind by Gustave Le Bon

or Edward Bernays:

Propaganda, an influential book written by Edward L. Bernays in 1928, incorporated the literature from social science and psychological manipulation into an examination of the techniques of public communication. Bernays wrote the book in response to the success of some of his earlier works such as Crystallizing Public Opinion (1923) and A Public Relations Counsel (1927). Propaganda explored the psychology behind manipulating masses and the ability to use symbolic action and propaganda to influence politics, effect social change, and lobby for gender and racial equality.[1