That one was agitated and allowed to fester by the papacy/jesuits to add continued disruption to the British "Empire" which has been under liquidation for well over a century now.
EDIT: For an example of one that appears to be natural, take the 1956 Hungarian uprising. But that one was crushed within 3 days by external USSR forces (while the UN looked the other way).
No, that was a few hundred militants driving soldiers of an empire out of their land. 🔫🍀💣
To the ones doing the uprising, it seems to be real. The reason they weren't liquidated and crushed is because external forces willed it. The UK has been under liquidation by international bankers since the American revolution.
Ordo ab Chao
What do I need to understand exactly? (I don't understand the subverse as of yet, I'm new)
I am totally in favor of the people taking their land back, but I keep finding sinister layers in history that seem to play multiple sides and there is overwhelming evidence of many of these festering revolutions continuing because some external party wants it.
Look at intersectional feminism for example, it's the same kind of thing, by causing constant and forever agitation so people are divided. When the governments need the troops not divided it's in order to blast in and quell an uprising against bankers somewhere else. This mostly stems from Catholic literature, passed on to other Jesuits such as Marx/Engels to perpetuate "persistent revolutions".
To the people revolting, I'm all with them. But consider the external forces and consider which ones fester and which ones don't and who benefits. Documentation is available to show all of it.
(post is archived)