|
Has the Catholic Church been
infiltrated?
30 Sep 2006
You don't have to be a Catholic -- or religious
-- to understand the significance of this question.
 Kay
Griggs explained that Zionists got control of our military by promoting
people they can blackmail.
You don't have to be a member of the military to understand the significance
of this.
DarylBradfordSmithInterviewsKayGriggs.html
Likewise, you don't have to be a Catholic to understand the significance
of a Catholic Church that has been infiltrated by Crypto Jews and
their blackmailed pedophiles.
A BBC documentary exposed the pedophilia in the Catholic Church, and
how the Pope covered it up:
vodpod.com/watch/803829-crimen-sollecitationis
(The video has been deleted again!)
Zionists infiltrate governments;
why not religions?
There is a tremendous amount of evidence that the Zionists
have been taking control of our media, our military, our banking system,
and the 9/11 truth movement.
More surprising is the evidence that the Zionists have also taken over
-- or created -- the White Supremacists, the KKK, and other Nazi-type groups:
• Ashkenazi-Nazis.html
• InfiltrationOrIncompetence.html
• AmericanDeceptionPress.html
There is also evidence that the Zionists in Russia were behind the communist
movement, and they started and infiltrated the anti-Communist groups in
an attempt to identify and kill their enemies.
Why wouldn't the Zionists want to
take over the Catholic Church? Why would they ignore such an incredible
opportunity?
Having control of such a large church would give them access to tens
of millions of Goyim children. They could train the Goyim to
be "Judeo Christians" who kill Muslims for Jesus.
By getting control of the Catholic Church, they could also ensure that
the church officials support Israel and never expose Zionist crimes.
The selection of the Pope in 1958
is suspicious
There are lots of reasons to believe that the Catholic Church
has been infiltrated. One example is the selection of the pope in 1958.
Pope Pius XII died on October 9, 1958. At the time there were 53 Cardinals
around the world. All except two of them traveled to Rome to select a new
pope.
One of the 51 cardinals who went to Rome, Celso Costantini, died
on October 17, 1958. On October 25 the remaining 50 were a few hours away
from going into their secluded room in the Vatican to start the process
when Cardinal Mooney died.
fiu.edu/~mirandas/conclave-xx.htm#1958
The next afternoon the remaining 49 cardinals signaled the world that
they had selected a new pope by sending white smoke up the chimney.
For those of you unfamiliar with the process,
the Cardinals vote on paper ballots, and after the vote they burn the ballots.
If they agree on a pope, they let the smoke be its natural white color.
If they fail to select a pope, they make the smoke black.
However, the new Pope never appeared, and the cardinals remained hidden
inside the Vatican. The people watching the Vatican assumed the Cardinals
made a mistake when they tried to make black smoke.
Later that evening the Cardinals again sent white smoke up their chimney,
and this time the smoke lasted much longer than normal, about five minutes.
Everybody assumed a Pope had been chosen, but once again, the Cardinals
remained hidden inside. After a while people assumed it was another
mistake.
dailycatholic.org/issue/04Nov/nov18mdi.htm
How could the Cardinals accidentally produce white smoke twice
in one day? The Cardinals refuse
to explain what happened!
Their "mistake", and their silence about it, has given rise to accusations
that a pope had been selected, but that an argument erupted over the selection.
Furthermore, what are the chances that 2 out of 51 Cardinals would die
just before selecting a pope?
This coincidence has given rise to accusations that one or both of those
Cardinals were murdered in order to
get rid of Cardinals who were too independent, and to show the other Cardinals
that they had better follow orders.
Is this a wild conspiracy theory? Should anybody waste their time considering
it?
Learn from 9/11
Those of you who have tried exposing the 9/11 attack have certainly
noticed that most people demand absurd amounts of evidence that the official
story is false. However, we need only one suspicious
event to justify asking the question,
"Is our government and media telling us the truth about the
9/11 attack?"
Furthermore, we only need one suspicious
event to justify a new investigation of the September 11 attack. The collapse
of Building 7, for example, is all we need
to justify a new investigation. Don't be fooled into thinking that we have
to answer everybody's questions about the attack.
We don't have to know what type
of aircraft hit the Pentagon, or who purchased the explosives that demolished
Building 7. We need to discover only one
suspicious aspect to justify a re-examination of the official story.
This concept applies to everything, not just 9/11. For example,
we need only one suspicious aspect of the attack on the USS Liberty to
justify asking,
"Is our government and media lying about that attack, also?"
If you don't know about the attack on the USS Liberty, take
a look at this:
DarylBradfordSmithInterviewsEnnis.html
Suspicious behavior is all we need
The peculiar events during the selection of the Pope in 1958
do not prove that the church is under somebody's influence, but
they are enough to justify asking the question:
"Is the Catholic Church under somebody's influence?
Asking this question will cause a lot of people to become upset, but don't
give in to the pressure. The events of 1958 justify this question.
If the 49 Cardinals had accidentally produced white smoke instead of
black smoke, why didn't they tell the world that it was merely a mistake?
We should consider the possibility that the Cardinals had indeed selected
a pope -- twice-- and they burned the ballots both times
to signal the world. However, both times the Cardinals were pressured into
selecting another pope.
The question nobody has the answer to is, if the only people in the
room where the 49 Cardinals, who was pressuring
them?
People such as Greg Szymanski want us to believe that the Vatican is
under the control of the Black Pope. Szymanski tells us that this
Black Pope is also the spiritual controller of the Illuminati and
the New World Order. Other people, such as Jim Condit Jr., believe
that the Vatican has been infiltrated by Crypto Jews.
realnews247.com/giuffre_on_oct_26_1958.htm
Why are "truth seekers" promoting
obvious lies about the Vatican?
Greg Szymanski, Eric
Jon Phelps, Vyzygoth, and other
"truth seekers" are constantly promoting nonsensical (and difficult to
read) theories about the Vatican. For example, one article from Szymanski
starts with:
| Former Bishop Gerard Bouffard of Guatemala said the Vatican is "the
real spiritual controller" of the Illuminati and New World Order while
the Jesuits through the Black Pope, Jesuit Gen. Fr. Peter Hans Kolvenbach,
actually control the Vatican hierarchy and the Roman Catholic Church. |
arcticbeacon.com/25-Sept-2006.html
Another of his articles starts with:
| The investigation concerning whether Abraham Lincoln was killed by
the devious and cunning hand of the Jesuit Order with the assistance of
the Vatican has been well hidden from the American people. |
arcticbeacon.com/14-Sept-2006.html
How about his article that starts:
| This week in Confession No. 12 by the shores of Brushy Creek we ask
whether the Jesuit Order masterminded the sinking of the Titanic, moving
next to discuss overlooked portions of author Eric Jon Phelps book, The
Vatican Assassins. |
arcticbeacon.com/9-July-2006.html
The peculiar thing about these theories is that it is obvious
-- even to people who are not Catholic -- that the Vatican is not
in control of the world, and the Vatican is not
responsible for 9/11, the Kennedy assassination, the sinking of the Titanic,
or Lincoln's assassination.
If you do not know much about the Catholic Church, and
if you consider that perhaps Szymanski and Phelps are correct that a Black
Pope is in control of the world, and that his army of Jesuits are responsible
for the world's corruption, Here is a file that might help you:
BlackPope.html
Why would Szymanski, Phelps, Vyzygoth, and other "truth seekers" promote
such
obviously stupid theories? Why
are they willing to spend so much of their lives and money to deceive us?
Why are they willing to make fools of themselves? Why are they willing
to expose themselves as criminals?
Why did they select the Vatican
for their deception instead of the Mormon church, the atheists, the Veterans,
the National Football League, or some other group?
These liars are spending a lot of their time and money on this
Vatican deception. They certainly are not
doing this for recreation. They certainly have a very important reason
for
promoting this deception.
As I have mentioned many times, when a criminal tries to cover up his
crime, he takes the risk of exposing more information about his crime.
The attempt by "truth seekers" to fool us into believing the Vatican is
responsible for the world's corruption can give us clues as to what is
really going on.
My initial assumption was that these liars were simply desperate to
blame 9/11 and other crimes on group other than Zionists, and they couldn't
think of a better group to blame it on. It would be difficult for them
to blame 9/11 on the National Football League, the Boy Scouts, or the Green
Party, for example.
However, the tremendous amount of time and effort these liars put into
promoting their deception about the Vatican makes the most sense if we
consider the possibility that the Vatican has
indeed been taken over by Crypto Jews.
In such a case, the job of people such as Phelps and Szymanski is to
divert
Catholics away from the evidence of that Jewish infiltration.
Again, learn from 9/11
Look at what that "truth seekers" are doing with 9/11. There
are lots of "truth seekers" promoting obviously idiotic theories, such
as the airplanes were illusions created by the television news crews with
"blue screen" software, or that Pakistan's ISI played a major role in the
attack.
Only naive or stupid people believe such idiotic theories, so why do
the "truth seekers" continually promote them? They don't fool any of us
intelligent people with such stupid theories, so why are they wasting their
time?
Why don't the liars promote a theory that at least makes a bit of sense,
such as Al Qaeda secretly installed explosives in the towers and Building
7? Why are they promoting idiotic theories about 9/11? Are they
really as stupid as they appear?
When a group of people continuously promote idiotic theories, and when
they do this year after year, and when they spend a lot of time and money
on this deception, we should assume that this is a coordinated activity,
and we should assume that they have a very important reason for their
deception.
Perhaps their goal is to create arguments, waste people's time on idiotic
discussions, and give conspiracy theories a bad image.
By creating hundreds of websites and radio shows with idiotic theories
on 9/11 and the Vatican, when somebody searches for information on these
issues, chances are very good that they will encounter the idiotic information.
This will reduce the chances that the person will learn the truth.
The idiotic theories can also cause a person to become irritated and
disillusioned with "conspiracy theories".
In other words, promoting idiotic theories on hundreds of websites and
radio shows is similar to putting dirt into a transmission. The dirt will
not stop the transmission from turning, but it can do a lot of damage.
If the Vatican has been taken over by Crypto Jews, the other Jews are
going to make a tremendous effort to keep this information hidden, and
to keep the Catholics confused.
Who was responsible for the Crusades
of the Middle Ages?
I was under the impression that the crusades of the Middle
Ages were instigated by mentally unstable people within the Catholic Church.
|
