Royals, CEO's, Suffragettes, and Celebrities - transgenders in positions of power

[Raskolnikov]

A big piece of the puzzle if you ask me. Why are there so many trannies at the top of the power pyramid? In royal families, married to powerful men or in positions of power themselves, leaders of the suffragette movement (the irony!), absolutely everywhere in Hollywood and in the media, taking over Congress, what is going on?

A few years ago, a friend of mine sent me a video that showed many of the wives in royal families are in fact biological men. At first it hit me like flat earth, I kinda just rolled my eyes and thought, "As if we don't have enough more pressing and important issues to concern ourselves with. Why would I waste my time with that?" But as time went on, it began to feel like a major piece of the puzzle and yet another reason they're pushing the trans thing so hard. I understand the breaking up the nuclear family/destroying the youth and turning them into lifelong customers of the pharma cartel/eradicating God connection and that they do it and everything else to defy God and destroy his creation, but honestly, the sheer number of trannies at the top is astounding. I wish I could find that video again but it seems to have disappeared, because the examples were many and they were undeniable. If anyone out there knows the one I'm talking about please add it below.

I'd like to start an extensive and all-consuming list or record of trannies in the royal families first and foremost. Just add pictures or videos or whatever you can find and maybe we can make some headway on this crazy topic. And then please add any in positions of power or influence that you might come across. We've all heard the rumors that Kathy Griffin (more irony) was the brother of Anderson Cooper of the Vanderbuilt line, clearly not a woman, and Big Mike, etc. Many even say there's major trannies in the Trump line, who's to say.

So here's a couple of vids to get it started. It's not my thread so please just feel free to add as you find them and keep it going. (And I don't vouche for everyone he calls a tranny but some are very obvious.)


Source: https://www.bitchute.com/video/lXFpv72bEwFl



Source: https://www.rumble.com/video/vxo93j/?pub=4

[COLOR="red"]

[Raskolnikov]

This one really struck me in that original video, it's just so in your face (start at 2:00)


Source: https://www.rumble.com/video/v14vnto/?pub=4

[Raskolnikov]

The Rockerfeller and Kissinger wives:


Source: https://www.rumble.com/video/v15gq39/?pub=4

[Le Chat]

Posted by Raskolnikov (here)
Source: https://www.rumble.com/video/vxo93j/?pub=4

[COLOR="red"]

The narrator seems to be labelling the women shown as 'trannies' without any evidence to back up her claims.
Granted, one or two do look like men, but then women on the whole looked more masculine and stern in those days.

[Le Chat]

Posted by Raskolnikov (here)
This one really struck me in that original video, it's just so in your face (start at 2:00)

I didn't watch past the 40 second mark because the narrator seems to think that the position of a 'belly button' in a certain location is indicitaive of a man. What nonsense.

[Raskolnikov]

Posted by Le Chat (here)

Posted by Raskolnikov (here)
This one really struck me in that original video, it's just so in your face (start at 2:00)

I didn't watch past the 40 second mark because the narrator seems to think that the position of a 'belly button' in a certain location is indicitaive of a man. What nonsense.

Agreed. That's why I said start at 2:00 and I don't vouche for everything he says.

[Mark (Star Mariner)]

Posted by Raskolnikov (here)
This one really struck me in that original video, it's just so in your face (start at 2:00)


Source: https://www.rumble.com/video/v14vnto/?pub=4

I'm pretty good at distinguishing between male and female. Granted, it takes a sharper eye these days to tell the difference, of yesteryear not so much. Stephanie looks female to me, here depicted with the short-haired androgynous look of the 1980s -- very popular at the time, particularly with pop stars, movie stars.

Who knows for absolute certain, maybe there is something in it -- but one thing I am certain about, emphatically so, is that Grace Kelly, a true beauty queen, was definitely not a man!

Pure female through and through.

[Brigantia]

I can't post photos as I've reached my upload limit, but take a look at Kate Middleton, now Princess of Wales. Broad shoulders, very long arms, and walks like a bloke; the hips of women are wider, so a woman will swing her leg out and round slightly when she walks, but with men the legs swing straight forward like those old wind-up toy soldiers.

When "she gave birth" to her first, mothers all over the country watched her skipping up the steps to Kensington Palace less than 24 hours after an alleged natural birth. They said that was impossible, you're in agony after that and have to wear a sanitary towel the size of a brick for at least a week.

Meghan's a bloke too; check out 'her' toy soldier walk.

[Raskolnikov]

Posted by Mark (Star Mariner) (here)

Posted by Raskolnikov (here)
This one really struck me in that original video, it's just so in your face (start at 2:00)


Source: https://www.rumble.com/video/v14vnto/?pub=4

I'm pretty good at distinguishing between male and female. Granted, it takes a sharper eye these days to tell the difference, of yesteryear not so much. Stephanie looks female to me, here depicted with the short-haired androgynous look of the 1980s -- very popular at the time, particularly with pop stars, movie stars.

Who knows for absolute certain, maybe there is something in it -- but one thing I am certain about, emphatically so, is that Grace Kelly, a true beauty queen, was definitely not a man!

Pure female through and through.

Attachment 52085

Noted. Again, I didn't say I agreed with all of his observations, definitely not Grace. I don't appreciate all his glaring leaps and assumptions either or his flippant style, many look feminine and there's nothing we can prove yet. I really need to find that other vid, these videos just had a few clips from it. I'm pointing to the obvious, especially in the category of wives of the uber-rich and powerful. There are some obvious ones even deep in our past. I know this subject is a turn off to most, it was to me for a long time as well. But there may be a connection here to many other topics discussed on this forum, another piece of the puzzle we're all trying to figure out, you know, the grand chess board called Earth. Well, just put it on the backburner for a while until we can gather more evidence. I wasn't so much declaring I'm right about anything as much as very intrigued and curious what others may have uncovered.

[waxamillionpehhgasus]

Posted by Raskolnikov (here)

Posted by Mark (Star Mariner) (here)

Posted by Raskolnikov (here)
This one really struck me in that original video, it's just so in your face (start at 2:00)


Source: https://www.rumble.com/video/v14vnto/?pub=4

I'm pretty good at distinguishing between male and female. Granted, it takes a sharper eye these days to tell the difference, of yesteryear not so much. Stephanie looks female to me, here depicted with the short-haired androgynous look of the 1980s -- very popular at the time, particularly with pop stars, movie stars.

Who knows for absolute certain, maybe there is something in it -- but one thing I am certain about, emphatically so, is that Grace Kelly, a true beauty queen, was definitely not a man!

Pure female through and through.

Attachment 52085

Noted. Again, I didn't say I agreed with all of his observations, definitely not Grace. I don't appreciate all his glaring leaps and assumptions either or his flippant style, many look feminine and there's nothing we can prove yet. I really need to find that other vid, these videos just had a few clips from it. I'm pointing to the obvious, especially in the category of wives of the uber-rich and powerful. There are some obvious ones even deep in our past. I know this subject is a turn off to most, it was to me for a long time as well. But there may be a connection here to many other topics discussed on this forum, another piece of the puzzle we're all trying to figure out, you know, the grand chess board called Earth. Well, just put it on the backburner for a while until we can gather more evidence. I wasn't so much declaring I'm right about anything as much as very intrigued and curious what others may have uncovered.

This whole topic is incredibly easy to derail because of this. Some are blatantly obvious whereas others are more questionable. On the questionable ones, you get someone claiming person X is trans, someone else doesn't think so, maybe they're just not so feminine or masculine, and that throws everything off course. The Rockefeller one is just right out there though.

Personally I think it's somewhat just about the perversion of the natural order of things. As (I would imagine) most of us reading and posting on this forum are trying to harmonize with the rhythm of nature, these people are trying to do the opposite.

I've also read compelling arguments that acceptance of trans is leading the herd to be accepting of anything related to transhumanism. Can't find the articles that I read on Substack that made those arguments currently though. I mean, the fact that transgender is just called "trans" and also shares the same prefix with their eventual goal is seemingly telling.

The acceleration of talking about transgender and having them in public positions of power is (seemingly) recent, which seems to track along with the general acceleration of their overall scheme too. I mean there are openly transgender people in positions of power too now which wasn't the case in the past.

One thing I'm curious about is how this starts from birth for some of these transgender people. Serena Williams for example. How exactly are they selected? And have they been enthusiastically going along with the ruse the entire time, or were they just viciously mind control programmed through trauma from birth, such as Cathy O'Brien was in "TRANCE Formation of America: True life story of a mind control slave"?

[Brigantia]

This thread reminded me a similar discussion about trans in high places, just found it - here.

There is a post with an illustration of Baphomet - the god with a beard and breasts.

[Raskolnikov]

Posted by waxamillionpehhgasus (here)
Personally I think it's somewhat just about the perversion of the natural order of things. As (I would imagine) most of us reading and posting on this forum are trying to harmonize with the rhythm of nature, these people are trying to do the opposite.

I've also read compelling arguments that acceptance of trans is leading the herd to be accepting of anything related to transhumanism. Can't find the articles that I read on Substack that made those arguments currently though. I mean, the fact that transgender is just called "trans" and also shares the same prefix with their eventual goal is seemingly telling.

The acceleration of talking about transgender and having them in public positions of power is (seemingly) recent, which seems to track along with the general acceleration of their overall scheme too. I mean there are openly transgender people in positions of power too now which wasn't the case in the past.

One thing I'm curious about is how this starts from birth for some of these transgender people. Serena Williams for example. How exactly are they selected? And have they been enthusiastically going along with the ruse the entire time, or were they just viciously mind control programmed through trauma from birth, such as Cathy O'Brien was in "TRANCE Formation of America: True life story of a mind control slave"?

I've had the same thoughts. How are they not more visible growing up? What's the protocol? And those they are unable to break, those who maintain a sense of conscience and refuse to take the left hand path, are disposed of, like a mother not feeding the weakest of her litter. It's a different kind of motherhood to be sure, especially if your mother's a psychopath - and a man to boot. Heartlessness. And yet they couch their ideas in philanthropy and profess to be the saviors. I recall Dave Chappelle's testimony on men in Hollywood being forced to dress up like women in order to climb the ladder of "success." Tom Hanks easily comes to mind, but so many others too.

Another thought, it says many of these couples had twins. They especially loved experimenting on twins. If two men can't procreate where are the kids coming from? Are there breeding centers? Of course with these bloodline families they might more appropriately be called "inbreeding centers."

[Brigantia]

Posted by Raskolnikov (here)

Posted by waxamillionpehhgasus (here)
Personally I think it's somewhat just about the perversion of the natural order of things. As (I would imagine) most of us reading and posting on this forum are trying to harmonize with the rhythm of nature, these people are trying to do the opposite.

I've also read compelling arguments that acceptance of trans is leading the herd to be accepting of anything related to transhumanism. Can't find the articles that I read on Substack that made those arguments currently though. I mean, the fact that transgender is just called "trans" and also shares the same prefix with their eventual goal is seemingly telling.

The acceleration of talking about transgender and having them in public positions of power is (seemingly) recent, which seems to track along with the general acceleration of their overall scheme too. I mean there are openly transgender people in positions of power too now which wasn't the case in the past.

One thing I'm curious about is how this starts from birth for some of these transgender people. Serena Williams for example. How exactly are they selected? And have they been enthusiastically going along with the ruse the entire time, or were they just viciously mind control programmed through trauma from birth, such as Cathy O'Brien was in "TRANCE Formation of America: True life story of a mind control slave"?

I've had the same thoughts. How are they not more visible growing up? What's the protocol? And those they are unable to break, those who maintain a sense of conscience and refuse to take the left hand path, are disposed of, like a mother not feeding the weakest of her litter. It's a different kind of motherhood to be sure, especially if your mother's a psychopath - and a man to boot. Heartlessness. And yet they couch their ideas in philanthropy and profess to be the saviors. I recall Dave Chappelle's testimony on men in Hollywood being forced to dress up like women in order to climb the ladder of "success." Tom Hanks easily comes to mind, but so many others too.

Another thought, it says many of these couples had twins. They especially loved experimenting on twins. If two men can't procreate where are the kids coming from? Are there breeding centers? Of course with these bloodline families they might more appropriately be called "inbreeding centers."

That's the thing... I was digging into the life of JFK Jr back in 2020, and I couldn't find a single pre-teen photo of his wife Carolyn Bessette. I came to the conclusion that her childhood bio was invented.

There also appeared to be a JFK Jr up until the age of 16 with straight hair... then JFK Jr appeared with a totally different personality and curly hair...

There is also this school photo of Kate Middleton; it looks like the hair at the sides was photoshopped. She is also standing in a line of boys and back in the day girls NEVER stood in amongst the boys or vice versa. I also read once that she said that she 'couldn't remember' any of her childhood friends. Can any of us say the same??

(Here's the link to the photo - I haven't managed to upload it.)
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...t-bullies.html

[jaybee]

Posted by Le Chat (here)

Posted by Raskolnikov (here)
Source: https://www.rumble.com/video/vxo93j/?pub=4

[COLOR="red"]

The narrator seems to be labelling the women shown as 'trannies' without any evidence to back up her claims.
Granted, one or two do look like men, but then women on the whole looked more masculine and stern in those days.

Agreed - I looked at the video and it's ridiculous (IMO) - also the claims in the other video in the OP - and other suggestions are weak - sorry Brigantia but there is no way Kate Middleton and Megan Markle are men...

Out of all the pictures thus far presented in this thread there may be a couple of transvestites that have been slipped in - but my general impression is that gas lighting the general public and creating confusion and suspicion on this subject is a PSYOP -

Quite a convincing case has been made about Michelle/Michael Obama - but even that has to be treated with caution because of the PSYOP and the possibility of image/video manipulation... but just because one transvestite has (possibly) made it to First Lady - that doesn't mean that lots of successful women in top positions can suddenly be revealed as men -

It's fashionable for many young people now to claim to be 'transgender' and a lot of times it's really hard to pin down their biological identity....but given a bit of time and observation - their biological sex becomes apparent...

All this kind of stuff is encouraged in the West by the Neo Fascist Globalist Elite.... to reshape the roots of our culture - and set us adrift away from the family unit.... it's also a handy thing to aid depopulation...

sorry to be a party~pooper / thread~pooper.... but the Suffragette thing was too much to let pass then once I got started the rest had to go

don't mind me - - carry on.....

[Raskolnikov]

Brigantia, that's a definite maybe on the photoshop. All cool jaybee, I'm not trying to sell you anything. Those who say no, all good, air it out, let it be known, don't hurt my feelings, but please don't let a bad narrator and some overzealous assumptions on his part kill the whole topic.

Chuckie Schumer's got some pull, how bout his little wifey?

[Raskolnikov]

The reason I started this thread was to begin an open dialogue. Throw **** out and throw **** back, like the monkeys they tell us we are. I sincerely appreciate everything contributed thus far - the positive and the negative. It's a dialogue, they rarely speed along without the occasional bump, pothole, or confusing detour. Hoping for some inquisitive and inquiring minds like my own who've been observing the real life twilight zone and trying to get to the bottom of it. I've been reading this forum since it's inception and have always valued it as a site capable of critical thinking, and that's why I welcome all opinions, because if you've made it to PA, you truly are the last of the pure bloods (not the inbreds or the AI they want us to be). Crazy to think it's come this far. So please feel free to lay it on the line. I'm not asking anyone to hold back. And again, I apologize for the horrible narrator in those initial vids but I just couldn't find the stuff I was looking for anywhere else.

That said, on with the show! Anyone know who this beauty is?

[Raskolnikov]

Posted by Le Chat (here)

Posted by Raskolnikov (here)
This one really struck me in that original video, it's just so in your face (start at 2:00)

I didn't watch past the 40 second mark because the narrator seems to think that the position of a 'belly button' in a certain location is indicitaive of a man. What nonsense.

Thank you Brigantia for the link to the Michael Obama thread, yes, yet another tranny wife in a position of power. Journeyman did a nice job of laying out the basics of the anatomical question you (Le Chat) categorized as "nonsense" here https://projectavalon.net/forum4/sho...=1#post1437423:

As I said, it's not definitive and I can no more prove it than I can prove that I'm not a brain in a jar and everything I experience is a simulation. I can however confidently state that thick, flat clavicles, square jaws, long arms, broad shoulders, widely spaced features, large dental arches, sloping foreheads and large skulls are all associated with biological male skeletal traits and that looking at Jayne Mansfield I can find lots of those signifiers. However, I'd be delighted to be proven wrong, so here's a challenge for that scientific mind of yours. Take a look at the skeletal indicators that differentiate male and female, those mentioned above or the Q angle, the relative length of arms, thickness of ankles, position of navel, hip ratio to arms, shoulder ratio to skull etc. Then apply them to the names you mentioned in that last post, inasmuch as it's possible on old photos that could've easily been retouched. I'd be very interested in your findings.

as well as also making the connection that this practice has been going on at least as far back as ancient Sumer and then rounds out his erudite post by saying:

It's a difficult one to get one's head around, but if as a thought experiment you imagine that there was a group of people who were very rich, very powerful, very determined and absolutely convinced of their POV and they wanted to do this, then how would they do it? Hormones, which could be administered pre or soon after birth, would alter many of the characteristics. Surgery, careful choice of fashion, or even using one's power and financial strength to influence the development of fashion, pushing trends which were most favourable for the concealment of gender or its expression in another way.

There are of course other levers on society which could be pulled and pushed. Massive prescribing of the pill, BPA plastics, phytoestrogen in foods, the explosion in trans rights stories and most of all the accelerated push towards the eradication of duality in gender and the idealisation of 'non binary' as a lifestyle choice. If one owned the influential magazines, the means to create the new stars, you could even have a globally famous celebrity pushing non binary clothing for infants?

[Raskolnikov]

Posted by Mark (Star Mariner) (here)
but one thing I am certain about, emphatically so, is that Grace Kelly, a true beauty queen, was definitely not a man!

Pure female through and through.

When it comes to a topic like this we can ultimately know nothing nor can we prove anything. How often do things change right now? How often are our preconceived notions proven wrong? Are your beliefs the same as 20, even 10, years ago? It's like waking up over and over and over again until you're no longer sure if you're in the dream and the waking reality. And which is real? Are we not trying to awaken? Awaken from what?

Let's just be careful that we don't become so sure of, or firm in, our beliefs that we close our minds and go back to sleep.

[Raskolnikov]

One more thing. A member pm'd me concerning this thread, a fantastic and long reinforcement of everything I've intuitively felt and discerned concering this issue, yet requested I not post his message thinking it would simply create division stating: "If you post what I sent you it will most certainly create division in the ranks. It will accomplish nothing, not on this forum." I wish I could post the whole message but will of course respect his decision. Yet I love this statement: "You've got the tiger by the tail brother! You are making people squirm in your new thread" and concludes: "Congratulations for bringing up this issue on the forum. It's entertaining - watching all the members squirm - they still think it's a new phenomenon when in truth it's been practiced by the cult that rules the Earth for thousands of years." I hope that's still respectful of your wishes my friend. Thank you for your outstanding feedback, and please join the thread if you feel so inspired...

[Brigantia]

Posted by jaybee (here)
... sorry Brigantia but there is no way Kate Middleton and Megan Markle are men...

Sorry Jaybee my friend, but they are... the way they walk is the clincher, as I mentioned the hips cannot be altered in transitioning surgery, just watch footage of them walking and you'll see what I mean. I've seen no end of photos and footage of those royals walking down stairs and that is why I'm convinced. Men walk down stairs with their legs straight, but a woman's knees bend out. For a female, try to walk by punching your legs straight out, you won't be able to maintain that for long; I've tried it and it's really uncomfortable. Also for males, try to swing your legs out and round when you walk, you'll probably end up falling over like the 6+ feet tall Victoria's Secret supermodels as they try to do that (that's something else in this vein to look at).

I can't access Twitter much without an account anymore, but there's an account (horrifyinghouseguest IIRC) that goes deeply into the anatomy details between biological men and women.

Maybe the OP video was lame, but there are many on the ball ones out there. Let's also bear in mind that this was done to these people in childhood and they had no choice to become Baphomets. Remember the news story of the 'coincidence' of Prince Philip knowing Kate Middleton's airline pilot grandfather back in the 1950s? I reckon s/he was earmarked at a very early age.

Posted by Raskolnikov (here)
One more thing. A member pm'd me concerning this thread,..."If you post what I sent you it will most certainly create division in the ranks. It will accomplish nothing, not on this forum."...

Very true. It's a shocking idea to realise that there is such a great lie out there and many will steadfastly refuse to entertain it.