Whistleblower who warned of VIP sex abuse ring found dead

originally posted by: anonentity
a reply to: Lumenari


A bit like Princess di?

Pretty much if anything i believe the reason Princess di was killed is mainly because the royal family highly disproved such a relationship of her choice.

It's already a well known established idea that the Vatican and it's priests are molesting children. For an addiction of this one would need a trafficker. I'm pretty sure just word of mouth is not enough to stop them so I don't think they would have been too worried about some drugged model talking #. It would have to take more then that. Unless she had video or audio of some kind other then her word. I don't get why they would kill her and not just that but in a way she warned about to the world. That's a very silly mistake on the Vatican who's kept this secret for decades until recently.

The way she warned us of her death is pretty accurate to say the least. So what if she did it her self. Not like an accidental od in a tub but on purpose to get those involved under a larger lime light. She warns us then dies in the exact same way... puzzling. The Vatican wouldn't make that big of a mistake nor the guy who's name I won't try to spell who's most likely helping these pervs.
What I find striking of all is how rampant pedo is. We have those in high government on both England and the US. Asian countries are trafficking beyond our comprehension. Mexico, Europe and the middle east.... how far does this rabbit hole go?... hell even pizza gate.... this is becoming an epidemic and needs to be eradicated.
For what purpose though. It can't just be about power. Children are easy to manipulate and control but that can't be the only factor. Small peckers but even that isn't enough. For how "popular" this is there has to be more... there has to be. Either we are not looking hard enough because the fear of death or deformation. Or we are not asking the right questions. Either way this needs to stop and now... before it becomes a trend like in other cultures....

This is my opinion, it's value is nothing compared to the price that's being paid behind our backs. Take it or leave it.

a reply to: TheGhoul

The sad thing is, it's not new. Historically in patriarchies, high class men would marry women younger and younger. At one point, as young as 16. Then 13. Then children (supposedly to wait until they came of age.) In matriarchies, mothers would often molest their children (pedo and incest) to achieve a psychological feeling of power. Likewise, many of their sons and daughters would go on to molest their children. As for the Church, this has likely been going on for a long, long time.

Power has a tendency to corrupt humanity past sensibility and compassion. Why children? It's a violation of the world's most sacred possession, therefore it (pedophilia) is the ultimate testament of ego.

If the Catholic Church condones molesting kids, it wouldn't blink an eye to have a whistleblower (or anyone else) murdered.

wow this interesting

I've read so many stories last year and years before that I've become disgustingly allergic to this organization using God as their excuse to legitimately execute and hide their atrocities and even karma is their biatch..

There must be a strong force keeping them going with what they're doing but it can't be God imho

Well this institution will never change and alway wants power .

Sad..

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
a reply to: Lumenari

" sending a message " simply validates her claim

just THINK

And why is it you think they do Not want to validate her claim? As long as there is no real evidence, I don't think they care. Look how many priests have been busted and people still go to their churches and cathedrals as if everything is fine.

But...but...but... THEIR CLAIMS WERE VALIDATED!!! And according to some folks *ahem* that actually MEANS SOMETHING!! ZOMG!!!

*crickets*
Business as usual.


I understand your skepticism cause, after all, who in their right minds would believe the Mother Church of Rome could be involved in something so antithetical to their mission stat-
*imagine a quick visual montage of Catholic Evil over the centuries with an emphasis on sexual misdeeds*
Ohhh...ok, yeah, I, uh... I kinda see what they're sayin now...

originally posted by: LoneCloudHopper2
a reply to: TheGhoul

The sad thing is, it's not new. Historically in patriarchies, high class men would marry women younger and younger. At one point, as young as 16. Then 13. Then children (supposedly to wait until they came of age.) In matriarchies, mothers would often molest their children (pedo and incest) to achieve a psychological feeling of power. Likewise, many of their sons and daughters would go on to molest their children. As for the Church, this has likely been going on for a long, long time.

Power has a tendency to corrupt humanity past sensibility and compassion. Why children? It's a violation of the world's most sacred possession, therefore it (pedophilia) is the ultimate testament of ego.

Yes, this is really the only form of inequity/inequality that matters, is the amount of power we have over others.

Studies have been done with monkeys, giving a few randomly selected "elite" monkeys extra bananas caused mental health issues with the other monkeys. The "average joe" monkeys could reason that these "special" monkeys had done nothing to deserve these extra bananas that they kept on getting.

I highly suspect the monkeys being given the extra bananas were also being mentally damaged, but issues are not as evident or perhaps they were not the focus of the study.

Here is links to previous articles and the "tweet".
voat.co...

It's just a thread from another site I found while looking into this.

This is crazy..

WTF

Here is an article that talks about Vera (accused trafficker) in his early days with Francis.
people.com...

Gustavo Vera and Lucas Schaerer, who work with the non-governmental organization La Alameda on problems of human trafficking, drug-smuggling and corruption, first met Francis in 2008 when he was Archbishop of Buenos Aires – and they needed his top cover.

So.. Vera was trying to "clean up the streets" and crusade against human trafficking in the area. (future Pope) Francis was helping Vera by arranging jobs/shelter for witnesses against trafficking in the area..

Wait, so if the model's allegations are true, Vera was basically doing what dirty cops with drugs do.
Catch all the criminals (except the gang they are with) to make themselves look like a white knight, while creating a monopoly for the gang the dirty cops are with.

This alone doesn't make Francis look guilty, but all the sex abuse in the church? Put two and two together and this is a mega conspiracy..

originally posted by: carewemust
If the Catholic Church condones molesting kids, it wouldn't blink an eye to have a whistleblower (or anyone else) murdered.

Well, from the little I read, she was making claims against Vera. However, as I mentioned previously, Pope Francis and Vera fought against human trafficking in the past. (Before being a pope)

It's crazy how some people do seemingly good deeds to hide their extreme evil. Like how a politician will be avidly against homosexuality, but get caught doing homosexuality acts.

a reply to: DBCowboy

Simple lesson-don't f with the Catholic church.

Apple could only dream of having their power and wealth, and it would be a surprise to no one what they get up to, they protected the pope's financier-the right hand man of the pope-from media scrutiny after child abuse charges only for social media to spill the beans.

Now how did they pull that off?

a reply to: ignorant_ape

Yes, you would. You need to think as they do. This was a warning to others that even if they do what she did they will still kill you and get away with it. The first thing they do is neuter the police through blackmail or hire those that are part of this. They work in groups. The pedos that don't work in groups get caught - at least that's what I've researched. Not sure what's true and not true but I hold all to be truth until proven otherwise. So far, the proof leans toward this statement that I made.

a reply to: 3n19m470

Interesting. I suspect you're right of course. Confidence is good of course but there is a conceited and anti-social attitude which can easily pass for 'confidence.' Only when a person displays certain traits can be labelled a 'sociopath.' I would argue that every person has this element of 'dangerous conceit' (shall we call it) which is usually somewhat dormant but it can be triggered by ego-boosting.