Nigel Farage Warns "The Establishment Is Losing Control Over The People"

Tyler Durden's picture

"The Empire is befuddled," at Brexit, exclaims Nigel Farage, telling Alex Jones that globalist establishment is clueless on how to regain control. In a wonderfully frank interview, Farage explained that the establishment's "problem is that it’s fighting this argument on several fronts at once.”

"We’ve got the American elections going on, we’ve got a big referendum coming up in Hungary on migrant quotas from Germany, we’ve got a rerun of the Austrian presidency where the right-wing candidate was cheated by false votes,” Farage said. “So they’ve got a real problem, they’re fighting us now on a whole series of fronts.”

 

“What will they do to fight back? I don’t know the answer to that yet, and you know something? Nor do they.”

 

Brexit is the first strike-back against this phenomenon of the big banks, the big businesses, effectively owning politics, willfully destroying nation-state democracy, getting rid of that thing our forbearers actually fought and shed their blood to create and to preserve our liberties and our freedoms,” he continued. “All of that being taken away and suddenly in a referendum that no one said we could win, and we’ve done it.”

 

“What we’ve done is given inspiration to freedom fighters right across the Western World.”

Farage then broke down how Hillary is aligned with the globalist agenda and how the US elections are crucial to the fight against globalism.

“Hillary represents everything that has gone wrong in our lives over the last couple of decades,” he said. “She is part of that phenomenon where all that seems to matter now is corporatism.”

 

“The big, global companies who want to set the rulebooks to effectively put out of business any small or medium-size competitors.”

And Hillary loves the supranational global-type bodies which are accountable to nobody, Farage continued.

“I think she sees the European Union as a prototype for an even bigger form of world government,” he stated. “If you want nothing to change at all, if you want to continue with the kind of cronyism that we see with the Clinton Foundation, if you want things to stay the same, vote for Hillary.

Farage also commented on Hillary’s public criticism of his recent US visit to speak at a Trump rally in Mississippi.

“Can I please use this opportunity to thank Hillary Clinton from the bottom of my heart for doing what she’s done?” asked Farage with a chuckle. “She’s raised my profile massively in this presidential election. So Hillary, thank you.”

Full interview below...

Source: InfoWars.com

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
trailbrake's picture

The establishment won't lose control until they have fiat currency to rely on. To open the road to Rome, we first must burn that bridge.

Chris Dakota's picture
Chris Dakota (not verified) trailbrake Sep 1, 2016 6:58 AM

Thank You Nigel!

As I said long ago, they have been given enough rope and then the unmasking begins.

Hell, they don't even care about their own children.

Weiner in his sext messages "My son is a chick magnet" the husband of the woman who "often confused" and  sick

Hillary will give the reins to can't even run her own household.

Now the mocking starts from Uranus in Aries (technology warriors).......HACKERS.

Enter the man with Uranus conjunct his Sun at the top of his chart, TRUMP!

It's everything I thought would be 20 yrs ago.

City of San Francisco job description: Women, women of color, LGBT encouraged to apply.

Everyone else pay your taxes.

 

 

 

ali_baba's picture

Nigel Farage is a slimy piece of shit. Instead of focussing on the problem (Zionist, corporate takeover of all Western nations) Zion Hedge wants you to go FULL RETARD and sign up to the KKK. Except what it really is, is the JKK.

bigkahuna's picture

Nice of you to drop by. /s

If he is a slimy POS then where does that leave the rest of the sociopaths that are out there? <--that apparently you support

Rhetorical question - go troll somewhere else.

SomethingSomethingDarkSide's picture

49 down votes.. I can go on some seriously racist tirades and even I don't get THAT many.  Lol.

Backin2006's picture

Signed in just for the sake of voting someone (a_b) down. That's a first!

Mountainview's picture

Give Nigel an American Passport. So he can run for president.

bigkahuna's picture

Urge your congressthing to support:

 

H.R. 1205, the American Sovereignty Restoration Act

 

https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/1205

yogibear's picture

Looks like there are a number of Hillary lovers out there.

Blackfox's picture

Nigel Farrage was funded by the same people who fund the Tory's to split the Labour vote - it worked like a charm.

All it takes is a 3 min Google.

Backin2006's picture

I would beg to disagree. No one funds Farage, they fund UKIP, his employers. The function UKIP plays in UK politics is insuring that the Tories don't tack to far to the centre, otherwise the Tories bleed protest votes to them in the election, and end up losing to Labour or going into coalition. UKIP is a pain in the behind for the Conservatives, but a boon to conservativism: if you get the distinction. They stop small-c conservative voters (the majority of the British electorate) being betrayed too brazenly.

beemasters's picture

I have mixed feelings about the chap cos he was aggressively anti Scottish independence. He wanted England to be free from EU but Scotland should never be free from England??? If that's not hypocrisy, I don't know what is.

Nexus789's picture

Big difference between the Act of Union between England and Scotland that can be traced back to 1603 and along with the other Acts of Uniion created the the United Kingdom. The useless EU on the other hand is a pointless project run by diwitted bigoted clowns. Farage is Brit like I am and I like him I would seek to preserve the Union over the increasingl irrelevant EU

macholatte's picture

it worked like a charm.

 

Yea?  Is that why it took nearly 10 years to unhidge the EU devil?

Go spread your hate speech somewhere else. We're all stocked up here.

 

wildbad's picture

i love nigel farage, i love alex jones..i love all of the people whi swinm against this shit tide of global corporatism.

and ali baba..go suck dick,  i mean that very personally

BigCumulusClouds's picture

Be careful with Alex Jones.  He orginally said the Sandy Hook and Orlando events were real when it was easily noticed from day 1 that they were stage government hoaxes.

And Jones has that phoney guy Dice on his website regularly.  Dice went out of his way to create a video that mocked those who said Sandy Hook was a hoax.  Everyone thinks the guy works for the gov.

Blackmax's picture

Troll alert!

Logged on just to downvote you.  You should feel honoured - I don't do that for every twat.

RafterManFMJ's picture

they don't even care about their own children.

First of all, despite my occasional rhetoric I'm not in any way anti-LGBT+; as a Nationalist small l libertarian it's not my business to control or sanction what you do UNLESS it negatively impacts me, or mine.

So that said I DO believe no homosexual should be allowed to hold any political office nationwide as their focus is on this life, not on the lives of future generations. Hillary is clearly a lesbian and this takes precedence in her mind, and most gays will not have kids.

Hedonism and narcissism are the rule.

Keynes, a childless homosexual devised a system that he knew would eventually end in cataclysmic fire; but childless his cynical reply to critics was "in the long run we're all dead."

Since homosexuals will forever place their own interests and interests of their peculiar tribe above the national interest, and are not often governed by what kind of world will be around for future generations, need to be barred from all office and public service.

When this nation burns and is rebuilt, we'd do well to implement this policy.

I am a Man I am Forty's picture

that's quite a broad brush, because you don't have kids you don't care about future generations?  i don't have kids so fuck mankind, i just assume the world burn since i'm not on it?  lots of heterosexuals don't have kids, i know a bunch.

RafterManFMJ's picture

No kids, an "alternative" sexual culture that is naturally out of synch and in fear of the mainstream (and often justified), and a corrosive "here and now" mentality.

This describes the majority.

You're dividing my argument then disengenously attacking one part of it; tiresome is your tactic.

beemasters's picture

"homosexuals will forever place their own interests and interests of their peculiar tribe above the national interest"

Is Soros a homosexual??? Straight or gay, I certainly wouldn't want him holding a government position. BUT he controls politicians...which is probably more dangerous.

Herd Redirection Committee's picture

Perfect example would be Elena Kagan in the Supreme Court.   Who is more difficult to bribe, someone who cares about the kind of country their grandkids will live in, or someone who has about 10 years left, and wants to make the most of it?

The Gun Is Good's picture

"that's quite a broad brush, because you don't have kids you don't care about future generations?  i don't have kids so fuck mankind, i just assume the world burn since i'm not on it?  lots of heterosexuals don't have kids, i know a bunch."

Right on. Yeah, the woman and I are proudly child-free. I think an argument can be made that people with children are often less likely to engage with society or make sacrifices for the betterment of society precisely because they have kids to look after... and this can make them sharp-elbowed, not-in-my-back-yard, me-and-my-family-first types who are less sympathetic to the needs of others. And they are certainly less likely to engage in the necessary warfare against tyranny, when their worries are all tied up in the immediate care of their children (not that this is wrong or unreasonable, mind).

I have friends and family who are well aware of the scam that is our present corrupt, elitist-run society, but who have openly expressed that they can't fight the good fight or rock the boat because of the fact they have kids; they have too much to lose.

Just sayin'....

Powerslaved's picture

That's just idiotic. Under your line of thinking the majority of the population must be homosexuals because our society as a whole is bankrupting the next generations in order to take care of ourselves now.

RafterManFMJ's picture

Dyscivic subcultures and barbaric cultures should never be allowed near the levers of power - if your intent is to maintain your civilization. If your intent is to destroy the current order then rhe solution is to promote same to power - adding an accelerant such as affirmative action, importation of vast numbers of fecund barbarians, these acts combine to force the burn date forward.

The excision of gays from power is but one tenet of building a stable and prosperous nation.

Herd Redirection Committee's picture

Sociopaths, thats the bigger category that needs to be outed (because they hate exposure, and there is no cure for what ails them, a lack of conscience).

Nexus789's picture

You have an unhealthy hang up about gay people. As far as I know there is no evidence of a correlation between being gay and also being psychopathic and/or sociopathic. Unless of course you can refer to some sources. 

rrrr's picture

To RafterManFM : There is more to the world than what you are seeing. Sure, some homosexuals think only of themselves. But so do straight men. And not all homosexuals do so, nor do all straight men. It's not because they're gay or straight. It's because they are human. It is characteristic of our species that many different types occur throughout, and every segment of the population tends to carry some elements of everything in some degree or form, not without exceptions of course, because that is how our universe is too. Additionally, homosexuals do not form groups that fit very well within the definition of tribes. It's more like communities, but not entirely. Moreover, if you would just grit your teeth and try to actually learn something about homosexuals, one thing you'd discover is that a very significant proportion of warriors, both ancient and modern, of all ranks, have been men who loved other men. With regard to your last two paragraphs, you --particularly you-- are not going to be able to identify a significant number of homosexuals, much less implement your unfortunate idea, because, for one thing, you simply don't know very much about the subject and will not reliably be able to figure out which men are homosexual and which are not. You probably think that every homosexual is a fairy and that therefore you can pick out every one of them. But many men whom you would think are totally straight don't even come close to being straight. One thing you can be sure of. Those who aren't will never let you know who they are. And no matter how careful you are, some men whom you choose to fill your public posts with will be rough and as queer as cowhide balloons.

ConnectingTheDots's picture

How did a story about the establishment losing control become a discussion on homosexuality?

PavlovPup's picture

When Rafterman derailed it and dispite his being resonable and fotrthright with his views several people felt he was wrong on the internet. You know what that means.

 

Powerslaved's picture

I had a conversation with my grandmother years ago. The topic of homosexuality came up. She insisted she had never met or known any. She was 72. I told her she had probably met hundreds over her lifetime and was probably good friends with several. Of course she insisted I was wrong.

thatthingcanfly's picture

rrrr:

Just about everything you wrote here is wrong - which is not unexpected, given the propaganda bombardment we Westerners have been subjected to since roughly the time of Harvey Milk's murder.

First, there are no such things as "straight" men. There are no such things as "gay" men either. These are constructs of "their" propaganda campaign. The word "gay" already has a definition: joyful, full of glee, happy. "Straight," used to describe a person (or personality) implies rigidity, lack of style, blandness. When "we" use these words in "their" context, we're contributing to the propaganda they've invented to manipulate perceptions. In reality, there are no "gay" or "straight" people; there are normal people, and there are homosexuals.

The contributions of homosexuals to the art of war are grossly overstated. Who are we talking about here besides Alexander? Undoubtedly, in the uncounted lower ranks, there have been homosexuals among the soldiers. But they kept that aspect of their lives under control and hidden, lest they find themselves on the receiving end of friendly fire. Testerone-filled young men who join the military don't like bathing with men who like bathing with men.

And then there's the claim I've heard all my life: that homosexuals are all around us and we don't even know it. 100 years ago, one might have been able to make that argument (though I don't believe it would have had merit). That argument might - might - still today may be made in the context of the armed forces. But in our age of "anything goes," I'm calling bullshit on this. I've known several homosexuals. They are few and far between, and tend to flock together. In places like San Fran, you've got a higher than normal concentration of them, for example. In my home town, they make up maybe a tenth of a percent of the population. And everybody knows. It's not some big secret. So where are all these homosexuals lurking in the wings all around us. With the taboo mostly removed, you'd be seeing them everywhere. But you don't.

I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

SteelRust's picture

"The contributions of homosexuals to the art of war are grossly overstated. Who are we talking about here besides Alexander?"

 

Ehr... Leonardo Da aVinci?

http://www.leonardodavincisinventions.com/war-machines/

 

Niccolò Machiavelli?

http://progettogay.myblog.it/2014/07/08/machiavelli-omosessuale/ (in Italian)

 

Ernst Röhm?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernst_R%C3%B6hm

 

PS: Alexander was not gay, more pansexual...

thatthingcanfly's picture

Of the three examples you gave, two were NOT homosexuals.

They state as fact in that stupid movie "The Da Vinci Code" that Leonoardo, who was celibate his entire life, was in fact a homosexual. Zero evidence for this, except for a harassing, anonymously-made sodomy allegation against him and four others in 1476 - a charge that was ultimately dropped as there were no witnesses to come forward, and no evidence.

And Machiavelli married and had six children for crying out loud!

 

You got one thing right though, Rohm was openly homosexual, and Hitler knew it. Though it's a strain to say Rohm contributed significantly to the art of war, which was the qualifier in my previous post to which you were replying.

 

Also, you're right about Alexander. He was not "gay," because there is no such thing!

SteelRust's picture

Leonardo was not gay? You are kidding, right? Let that moronic Brown book rest in peace and inform yourself on some (not USA, if possible) REAL history book.

thatthingcanfly's picture

Leonardo da Vinci was not a homosexual. Nor would a reasonable person assume, in the absence of evidence, that he was.

If you believe he was, the burden is on you to show some evidence of this.

SteelRust's picture

Sooo... neither of us was a Leonardo's close friend with first hand experience of his life, but I should show evidence of my (and of many historians - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_life_of_Leonardo_da_Vinci ) opinion, where what you say has instead to be taken as an article of faith.

Oh well, so the world goes, I suppose... :-D

thatthingcanfly's picture

Go back and re-read that wikipedia article you linked. The man was celibate his entire life. All those propagandists masquerading as historians, claiming they believe Leo was a homo, are relying on nothing but their own leftist pop-culture-inspired conjecture.

And yes, when you are making a bold statement such as "[insert famous historical figure] was a homosexual," you DO have to provide some supporting evidence, while those of us defending the null hypothesis DO NOT have to provide evidence. Heterosexuality is the default presumption.

Things that go bump's picture

Rather than looking at sexual orientation as an either or thing, it works better when you look at sexuality as a spectrum with those who are exclusively straight on one end and those who are exclusively gay on the other with the majority somewhere in between.

Kirk2NCC1701's picture

Under the label 'Public Service', I'd include Teachers and Priests. If they're lezbo or queer, get outta here!

Things that go bump's picture

So sorry. We'd have to get rid of most priests. These days most Catholic priests don't really fit into what you'd consider the straight end of the sexual orientation spectrum. As a career choice, it's more attactive to men who don't really need women and are attacted either to other men or to children, and I do believe that pedophilia is a sexual orientation and thus not really treatable or curable. 

Herd Redirection Committee's picture

When was the last time you heard 'the Church' criticize war, the Military Industrail Complex, cultural marxism run amok, etc.  Oh, never?   I wonder if they even realize how effectively they have been muzzled.

Things that go bump's picture

The Church has always been hand in glove with government. It was designed that way from the first.

thatthingcanfly's picture

This is the precise polar opposite of the truth.

Please stop writing on topics you have made no effort to understand.

Golden Phoenix's picture

Really tired of people who think they're better than others and the world owes them something simply because they couldn't figure out how to use a condom. Here's another method of birth control - fuck yourself.

prmths2's picture

statement: "Since homosexuals will forever place their own interests and interests of their peculiar tribe above the national interest..."

rebuttal: Log Cabin Republicans (in particular, the man who was beat up while attending the Trump rally in San Jose)

shamus001's picture

REST ASSURED the U.S. will not be making the same mistake as the globalist made with BREXIT. SO....

When the voting is rigged

When the "representatives" are representing their bank accounts and not you

When the noose begins to tighten around the elites necks

Purging the corrupt "supervillians" from oppressing the common man will come down to the same thing it's ALWAYS came down to:

Pitchforks & Lead

Since the British people have effectively been "domesticated" and had their "teeth pulled" I suppose investing in British pitchforks will be the investment of the year?  Sadly, UK will not be free'd from the Elite grip, because the UK people have no firearms and the Elites DO!

So, for the SECOND time, America will have to come over there and help out our cousins, who will be THOROUGHLY crippled,oppressed and starving, by the time the armed citizenry over here get our house in order.  Then what?  We jointly move into Europe and lose the lives of our children trying to free the dumb socialist dreamers in Europe from the $hit-pile they've created for themselves AGAIN?  Sheesh... History REALLY IS CYCLICAL!