Last night being the last night before Lent, I went out to dinner for one last round of my favorite yum-yums and slurp-slurps. As I walked in, I saw a very well-dressed middle aged man who projected anger and misery from every pore sitting alone. I was seated at the table directly adjacent. Sure enough, he was extremely nasty to the staff, as they offered him something while he waited for the rest of his party to arrive.
A few minutes later, in walk three more well-dressed middle-aged men, one of which was a flaming queen. The other two men, I could hear, were not American. I overheard later that one was Swiss and the other German. A few minutes later, a middle-aged Jew, well-dressed and wearing a yarmulke, walks in carrying a plastic bag filled with Ziplock plastic containers. I sat there thinking, “Oh no. No, no, no. He didn’t bring his own FOOD up in here, did he?” Yup. He gave the bag to the manager and sniffed instructions about heating it up. So, let me get this straight. You are SUCH a pious, devout Jew that you can’t eat ANYTHING except your own super-special “ritually pure” food, but you can sit at table with a flaming sodomite? Sorry, gotta call bullshit on that bullshit right there.
So the party has now arrived. It turns out there had been some sort of a symposium for lawyers to discuss “international law” (read “power politics”) at a nearby university. All five were law school professors and presenters at the symposium. Mister Miserable, it turns out, is a law professor at Columbia who lives in – his words here – “gentrified Harlem, VERY close to the Clinton Offices on 125th Street…” (The other four ooohed and ahhhhed at this.)
At this point I took out my phone and started taking notes, because what was sitting next to me was a table of Champagne Communist “thought leaders”, three American and two European. Ho ho ho. This should be FASCINATING.
The faggot did something that I have never before heard. He referred to his sodomite partner as his “wife”, but referred to him as “he” and “him”. I guess at this point, it is all about removing all possible meaning from language for these wretches.
So, let’s get started. Everything below is paraphrase. It was all I could do to keep up the note-taking without it being obvious that I was taking notes on their conversation and not “chatting” with someone on my phone.
Topic 1: Nationalism is bad and must be completely purged from humanity.
The Swiss law professor went on a rant about how “deeply engrained” the scourge of Nationalism is in the human mind, citing Switzerland as his example. Switzerland contains four separate groups: German, French, Italian and Romansh. And even though it is a tiny country, very politically and socially liberal, with four discreet cultural groups with DIFFERENT LANGUAGES, all the Swiss people STILL, he lamented bitterly, identify as SWISS. If the Swiss all still have this deep Nationalistic pride and identity, imagine how much harder it will be to purge Nationalism from the Germans, or, THE FRENCH!
Topic 2: Typical woman…
They then started talking about the speakers at the conference. One was a Dutch female law professor. “Is she straight?” “Yeah, she’s straight. And she expects to be submitted to because of her gender!”
I laughed out loud.
Topic 3: Law by Stealth
The fag then began to hold forth on how much appreciated the presentation of the Swiss guy, particularly the tactic of “Law By Stealth”, and how well that concept “fits in with our project”. Indeed. Also with Bergoglio’s project. Law By Stealth. It’s their own term, kids. Start using it. That is what all of this crap is.
Topic 4: Was he a threat?
The fag then asked the table who “the man in the back, with the long hair, that asked the questions” was. Someone answered, “He’s English”. The fag then asked, “Is he a threat?” Because people who ask substantive questions are “a threat”.
Topic 5: The Goal Is Global Fascism
The Swiss lawyer, it turns out, also has a private practice. When the Fag started talking about how all “private law” is really just a subset of the “imperial governmental” paradigm, and cited ICANN as his example, the Swiss came right out and said that the only possible model is total global control of all trade and businesses. Global Fascism. He said the “biggest player” is the “OMNIPOTENT REGULATOR”, which can be the “good company”, that is a company that is fully controlled by and submissive to the state, “that is so powerful” that it becomes the de facto regulator. His example? You guessed it: Apple.
Topic 6: Human rights – Fascist style
The Swiss then, in the context of Apple, assured the table that with regards to human rights, “they only do it for the public perception”. The point being, since Apple is “omnipotent”, they are their own regulator, and they decide what their human rights regulations will be. Then the grumpy Columbia professor chimed in: Apple absolutely breaks the law in Asia, but we (the former U.S.) are fine with that, because it is all “handled between friends”. Apple is for the “greater good” – that is the globalist-fascist agenda – so “why not let them flex their power?”
Feeling nauseated yet?
Topic 7: Something minor…
I missed the context of this quote, but I darn sure recorded the punchline. Someone said, “What are they protecting?” The Swiss replied, “Their sovereignty or something. Something minor.” And it wasn’t a joke. He was dead serious.
Topic 8: The flaw in the current EU system is…
The German said, “In terms of the EU, WE DECIDE.” Yeah, we noticed, Franz.
Then Columbia said, “In joining the EU, didn’t the Danes give legal supremacy to the EU?”
Then the Swiss said, “The Parliament is technically supreme, so the flaw is that there is no supreme EU norm. Denmark has a constitution, yes, de jure, but it is meaningless, de facto.
Topic 9: Free market competition should only be allowed if I benefit from it personally…
Columbia Commie then started talking about how it cost his $100 to take a cab from JFK airport to Harlem, but if he used Uber, it only cost $35, and thus “I always take Uber.” The Fag then said, “I always take the bus.” Columbia Commie then replied, dripping with sarcasm, “Don’t worry. I won’t tell. It’s your contribution to the “fight against global warming”. At this, the table exploded into laughter.
Topic 10: We Must Make Our Own State…
The Swiss said, “The solution to all of this is to separate. We must make our own state.” At this, the Jew piped up and said, “So, the “Two State Solution?” At which the table again ERUPTED into uproarious laughter. That was the biggest laugh of the night, by far.
Well, that’s Part 1. Check back for Part 2….
By Ann Barnhardt