It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

All Roads Lead to Rome

page: 80
607
<< 77  78  79    81  82  83 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 28 2010 @ 09:31 AM
link   
reply to post by JohnPhoenix
 


First before I respond to your latest post, the way you lay them out is positively tortured. If you intent to quote other members learn to use the quotation function on ATS, not only so you honestly display what the other poster said, verbatim, but so it’s possible to ascertain where one posters words end, and yours begin.

So in addition to asking you once more to read the thread, please also learn the rudiments of ATS.




I just love how you fill your post up with lots of fluff to avoid answering my questions.


Like the thread itself, it appears you only have an interest in reading very specific things, while I have an interest in posting very broad based helpful and informative things. So just like the 80 page thread you now want to participate in without reading, or having the benefit of the knowledge of, you also seem inclined to cherry pick over the very helpful and instructive advice that will help you to positively interact productively on this thread.

This is not a on the 12th of July the World Will End Thread from a attack of genetically mutated killer whales.

This is a thread that has attracted some of the brightest and most scholarly and learned minds on ATS.

It’s full of a vast array of very helpful knowledge and sources to even more knowledge on a lot of very pertinent things, that many members have found positively helpful and worth their time in reading.

Hint: There is a reason why many members enjoy my posts and threads.




Prove it. I have read other historians accounts about Jesus's and his life and they do line up with what Christians says about Him. To say that we only have the account of Josephus is absurd..


I imagine you have, however what I can’t ascertain is who those historians were or what source(s) of information that they used.

If 20 historians are all using the same source of information, and that source is controlled by Rome, then no, you don’t have 20 independent accounts; you have 20 different people writing the same story utilizing the same source.

Further were they presenting real history, or where they promoting an idea and agenda in regard to history. In other words what was the agenda and point of their writings, as if they were commercial writings, they had to have a commercial hook.

So once again here we have a person obsessed with sources, who doesn’t even have the propensity, or inclination or capability of providing their own sources, that they have used to substantiate their own world view.

Instead what you are presenting is an argument based on ’20 people’ who are not named, from 20 books that are not named, that supposedly in your estimation have imparted some ‘valid’ level of knowledge, where because you now feel a certain way, and are willing and desirous to say you now feel a certain way, we are all supposed to feel that way too, even though we have no idea how you arrived at that conclusion.

So while we have no chance to read the 20 unnamed books and authors, you have every chance to read the thread to get all the sources involved in it!

Please be aware that all you are doing is what you are errantly accusing others of doing, even though others are not doing that.

All my sources are listed throughout the thread, you have yet to provide one for any of your opinions.




Your right. I didn't read the whole thread 79 pages plus. I did not mean to say I had. I meant to say, - My questions were based on your original posts that should have contained all the info needed. Since they did not, I felt reading the rest of the thread was just a waste of time.


Your posts talk a lot about your feelings; this is ATS not a psychoanalyst office.

Your feelings are neither scientific, scholarly or rooted in anything similar.

Read the thread!




What about Tacitus?


What about him? Pulling names from a hastily scanned historical piece is not a precise indicator that you know anything about Tacitus, since you have no specific question(s) in regards to any of his writings.

The thread is an intellectual discussion on a conspiracy, not a place to pretend pseudo intellectualism based on feelings is intellectual, and once again if you have a real intelligent question, I will be happy to answer it.




What makes you think the real Christians from Britannia's "Christ" was not a Jew? You give no sources. You say they were druids, but they could have been converts to Christianity. If they didn't believe in Jesus as the Christ and him being Hebrew.. then just what did they believe.. Where did their Christ come from?


Where did I say the real Christians worshipped a figure called Christ? What I said is the real Christian Sect hailed from Britannia, I did not say that the sect had any form of worship of an individual named Christ.

What I did say is that Jesus Christ is patterned off of Julius Caesar.

Jesus Christ = Julius Caesar
Judas = Brutus
The 12 Disciples = The 12 Lictors
Jesus died on the cross for your sins = Caesar died on the Senate Floor for your sins.

The similarities between the Christ Character and their attributes and Caesar’s are myriad and undeniable.

What was the original Druid religion based on? That would be the one wiped out and obscured by Rome that you want all the details on from what Internet site?

If you want to learn more about the Christ Sect and Britannia I suggest once again you either read the thread or use Google or visit a Library as there is a tremendous amount of information out there on that.

Once again the thread is not a religious thread, and once again, all this has been touched upon extensively in the thread you ‘feel’ you would not be well served by reading.

One of the problems though with not reading the thread is you are obviously having a very hard time even comprehending precisely what I did say, which is only compounded by you not properly using the quote function and your inability to frame lucid arguments as a result.

You seem to be suffering from insisting people live up to some imaginary standard you have for others, that you don’t seem capable of meeting yourself.




Where do you get this info? Do you think the Romans killed or captured all the Jews or made them all flee the city? "


You might really want to READ THE THREAD!




I find all of these things very highly unlikely. Christians developed in many of the cities around the Mediterranean and they were commonly traveling to Rome and other places. If I cannot trust the truth in these things you claim, then why should i take the rest of your post at face value?


Sources? What are those sources, where do they come from? Rome!

Once again no one has asked you to take anything on face value, what you have been asked to is to read the thread.

It really is a shame you want to take this approach, there is so much knowledge and wisdom interspersed throughout this thread.

Once again read the Thread and if you really have some serious intelligent questions then ask them.

Thanks!




posted on Jun, 28 2010 @ 10:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by masqua

Originally posted by JohnPhoenix
I truly get it now. You're all bonkers.



I guess that includes myself, then?


On topic:

Certain recent RL concerns have kept me from posting more revelations out of Gibbon's The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire (published in its entirety in 1776) which, imho, still plays a huge part in how America and indeed much of the western world is governed today, both in regards to politics and religion. I fully intend to come back to this thread in a large way to prove that point with future posts.

Question: was America founded on the principle of 'freedom of religion' or 'freedom from religion' and what is the difference between the two?





Well in all fairness your Avatar Picture does have very mirthful and mischievous eyes!

There is a huge difference between freedom of religion and freedom from religion, and no America was definitely not founded on freedom from religion even though many of the founders were obviously atheists and agnostics, and this is most evidently displayed in the Oaths of Office our Public Officials take who swear oaths on the Holy Roman Bible and promise God to dispatch their duties to the best of their ability.

Further in the Pledge of Allegiance we pledge to be “One Nation under God”.

Further on our money “In God we Trust”.

Religion is often interjected into the political process and by politicians in their policy initiatives and sales pitches for them.

So no, Americans are not free from religion, elements and aspects of it are imposed constantly on everyone, agnostic, atheist, and congregants and members of the laity alike.

As I have pointed out before one of the most troubling aspects of all this, is that God legally is the Vicar of Christ the Pope in Rome, so while nowhere does anyone come out and say that these oaths and pledges and currencies are all to the Vicar of Christ, legally they could be construed as such because the Vicar of Christ is legally God on earth.

In my humble opinion, that one element alone makes this a conspiracy that anyone would be well served to ponder and consider.

Yesterday as I was walking to the beach, a public space, I was pondering the difference between Public and Private Property.

More specifically how places became private and by what mechanism, since after all both the private and public lands I was traversing were originally the territory of a people displaced through violence (the First Nation’s People of America). So how did it end up in private other hands?

Once again it all goes back to the Divine Right of Kings, as various European Monarchs laid claim, with the Pope’s Blessing to the lands from a Papal Bulla in 1490. Interestingly time two years before Columbus undertook his voyage of discovery, a voyage of discovery that was years in the making and planning.

In other words the Pope was deciding everything that laid past a certain point on a world advertised as ‘flat’ under the penalty of heresy for stating different, belonged to him, even though nothing was considered to even be there, at the same point in time monarchs who derived their power from Rome were promoting a venture that would prove not only that the earth was not flat, but would add considerable more land to their already vast holdings.
The Pope gave the lands he declared property of Rome to the Monarchs in exchange for them using their own funds and people to secure them.

So title to everything both Public and Private I was walking on started and originated in Rome, the whole concept of Title starts and originates in Rome, and the power to lay claim through Title as well.

So the Monarchs laid claim to these lands and sold them off piecemeal as their own, even though in most if not all cases they never set eyes or foot on the land, and violently drove those who were already on it off of it.

They then sold or awarded huge swaths of lands to their chief elites and political supporters, who in turn have been selling them off piecemeal ever since, taxing people to live on the very lands they acquired through this process of purchase, preventing them from ever owning it or anything free and unencumbered.

Where does the paper trail begin, Rome!

So people who don’t want to see the tie ins are really missing the boat.

I thought about the homestead act in the late 1800’s where the government gave substantial acreage it had laid claim to through this Divine Right of Kings/Papal Process to people in order to have it productively settled and secured.

No purchase required, just develop it, just pay taxes, just create a revenue stream for the Government the State, the all powerful State owner and controller of everything, States based on that process of Roman titling, which leads me to two things.

Clearly the United States was a business venture of the European Monarchs, the Elites, and the Vatican.

Displacing the original inhabitants, securing the land, and making it productive and profitable where the keys.

Enticing people to face those dangers, necessitated freedom of religion, but not freedom from religion, as religion itself would always be the basis for the religious morality laws, that would then regulate these wild places, once secured and developed into easily governed and controlled lands, as God’s Law as defined by the State was imposed on the people who turned these lands into budding and thriving societies, even though many of them were anything but religious and pious in nature.

There is something real that is fundamentally wrong with out world, the disparity between the haves and the have not, the disparity between the power of the masses and the State, the lack of opportunity and real freedom from a system of Corporate Governance with hundreds of thousands of rules to regulate everything to the State’s profit, advantage and control.

As the ongoing situation in the Gulf of Mexico displays we have reached a point where we are now literally killing the very planet and all other forms of life through the gluttonies of Corporate hording and State controls, and a never ending desire to profit off of the leverage of hording resources in such a way that create such a disparity.

We need to rethink, there may in fact not be much time left for us to do that.



posted on Jun, 28 2010 @ 11:04 AM
link   
Forget the bloody thread and the info in it.. that is irreverent to what I asked you. I asked you about YOUR SOURCES on certain points YOU MADE.. now if you have to tell me to go get my answers someplace else because you cannot answer a few simple questions, that ONLY have to do with what YOU said, than that surely tells me you must have made it up.

I have no interest in reading through 79 pages of stuff for something so simple that you could just answer easily.. Your behavior makes no sense whatsoever.

What is bonkers are people who fail to read and understand the simple points I asked you to give sources on. It's So Simple A Caveman Could Do It!

It boils down to 3 things I am asking you.. but it seems people have such a hard time understanding these simple things that I felt I had to expound on it.. Come on people.. it's simple reading comprehension, but I broke it down so Dead people could understand it!

~~~~~~~

Post1

I just love how you fill your post up with lots of fluff to avoid answering my questions.

Using that divide and conquer tactic yourself now are ya?

You say, " In fact I think one of your two asked 1,000 times questions was how do you know Josephus presented a false picture of those times as the only Historian who’s writings have survived that time of the fall of Jerusalem and the only writer who was in fact a Roman Citizen.

[ No, I didn't ask about that. - That was not part of my question ]

Your question answers itself. Why would have only one writer’s version been promoted by Rome all these centuries? "

Prove it. I have read other historians accounts about Jesus's and his life and they do line up with what Christians says about Him. To say that we only have the account of Josephus is absurd..

Your right. I didn't read the whole thread 79 pages plus. I did not mean to say I had. I meant to say, - My questions were based on your original posts that should have contained all the info needed. Since they did not, I felt reading the rest of the thread was just a waste of time.


What about Tacitus?

Josephus may have been a Roman citizen, but he was also a Jew. " promoted by Rome" is the key here. You know Roman Christianity is not accepted as a true account of Christianity to anyone but the Catholics. They are a religious sect filled with pagan influence and that's provable historically.

This has nothing to do with what true Christians believe. The accounts are like night and day.

And besides. I didn't even ask about Josephus. ( misdirection on your part - or, you didn't understand my questions ) I don't give one iota what Josephus said, I do not base my Christian belief on it. I asked you to give sources for some of your claims. Here, I'll re-post:
~~~~~~~~~~

"I believe Rome's form of Christianity was a fabrication, but you seem to imply here they the "real Christians" from Britannia would not believe their Christ was a Hebrew and this was made up by Josephus. That these Christians had to be silenced because they could expose Romes plot.

What makes you think the real Christians from Britannia's "Christ" was not a Jew? You give no sources. You say they were druids, but they could have been converts to Christianity. If they didn't believe in Jesus as the Christ and him being Hebrew.. then just what did they believe.. Where did their Christ come from?

[ based on your statement:

Yet there was a problem, what to do about the real Christians? While they were relatively small in numbers in Rome, and influential as they were all slaves, and originally came from a remote part of Britannia it would do little good to have any who could actually deny that their God Christ was not from Jerusalem or attached in any way to the Hebrews. ]

[ If Josephus is your source for the above, why do you feel all Christians believe this as you seem to imply? - Where did you get the info about the Britiannia Christians- whom you claim were the only real Christians in Rome ??]

Please give sources on this.

You also say no Jews would be in Jerusalem because of the take over..And so no one would be around to prove or disprove the story of this "Christ" the Romans were inventing. But you do not give sources for this either.

[Based on:
With Jerusalem cleared out and devoid of the Jews there were in fact no Jews there to challenge the myth that soon would be Christ. ]

Where do you get this info? Do you think the Romans killed or captured all the Jews or made them all flee the city? "
~~~~~~~~

You are saying that the only real Christians in Rome came from Britiannia Not even the region Jesus was from - that they would not believe Jesus was a Hebrew, (If not, what did they believe according to your source?) - that there were no real Christians in Rome from the Mediterranean region.

You also claim Jerusalem was devoid of Jews after Rome marched on it.

I find all of these things very highly unlikely. Christians developed in many of the cities around the Mediterranean and they were commonly traveling to Rome and other places. If I cannot trust the truth in these things you claim, then why should i take the rest of your post at face value?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Post 2


Originally posted by jackflap
reply to post by JohnPhoenix


Fascinating post JohnPheonix. I'm just not sure exactly what you are trying to figure out though. Are you challenging the theory that Jesus was a fabrication of Rome? Or are you challenging the theory that the Jesus was not Jewish? I really cannot tell what it is you are asking here.



I am saying PT is making these claims and I am asking him for his sources. I edited my post, but perhaps you did not see the last bit because I was so long in editing.

Here is the last bit.. these are the things PT is claiming that I want sources for.

"You (ProtoplasmicTraveler) are saying that the only real Christians in Rome came from Britiannia Not even the region Jesus was from - that they would not believe Jesus was a Hebrew, (If not, what did they believe according to your source?) - that there were no real Christians in Rome from the Mediterranean region.

You also claim Jerusalem was devoid of Jews after Rome marched on it.


I find all of these things very highly unlikely. Christians developed in many of the cities around the Mediterranean and they were commonly traveling to Rome and other places. If I cannot trust the truth in these things you claim, then why should i take the rest of your post at face value?"
~~~~~~~~~~~

PT is also claiming the only testimony we have that Jesus the "Christ" was a Hebrew was from Josephus's writings and that it was all made up for the sake of Rome's plotting. I dispute this also.

To be clear on the above. I do not dispute Josephus made stuff up. PT and I are in agreement with this. But then PT acts like he believes Josephus's account on Jesus's lineage. If PT believed Josephus makes stuff up, then why does he believe this? I dispute that the only account we have that Jesus was a Hebrew was from Josephus.

PT says this in his post above: "Josephus presented a false picture of those times as the only Historian who’s writings have survived that time of the fall of Jerusalem"

This is exactly what PT posts in the order he posts it:

"
Josephus also known as Yosef Ben Matiyahu was a first-century Jewish Historian and Roman Citizen also known as Titus Flavius Josephus, the Titus commissioned to begin writing what are largely the only known non-biblical accounts of the Sack of Jerusalem, and the first real formulation of it’s religion to the Roman World at large.


en.wikipedia.org...

The seeds were slowly being planted for the world’s greatest conspiracy ever, a conspiracy still taking place today. A conspiracy perhaps destined to finally succeed after millennia in the making in our lifetime.

The religion that would give birth to Jesus Christ, a figure to metaphorically patterned off of Julius Caesar was being born through Josephus’s popular accounts.

In the process the Hebrew themselves were being written into a guaranteed position in the plan, one that would never stop paying dividends. One well worth the sacrifice by its leaders, of a capital that they had only come to occupy a scant few hundred years before after wandering the entire Middle East for profit.

Back in Baghdad a city that they had previously ruled, and kept close ties too, they would patiently wait for the next part of the plan to unfold, their investment in Rome, all the more secure for it.

With Jerusalem cleared out and devoid of the Jews there were in fact no Jews there to challenge the myth that soon would be Christ.

False Flag Number Two the Burning of Rome


Yet there was a problem, what to do about the real Christians? While they were relatively small in numbers in Rome, and influential as they were all slaves, and originally came from a remote part of Britannia it would do little good to have any who could actually deny that their God Christ was not from Jerusalem or attached in any way to the Hebrews.
~~~~~~~~~~~"

It seems to me PT is saying all this info is coming from Josephus.

You see, PT needs these things to be true because these events if true sets up the situation for later events in his original post. If these are untrue, how can he use this info as a basis for claiming other events?

His claim that "With Jerusalem cleared out and devoid of the Jews there were in fact no Jews there to challenge the myth that soon would be Christ"

And this challenge that Jesus was a Hebrew (made up by Josephus for Rome's plot) - that it couldn't be dis-proven because there were no Jews in Jerusalem, is just silly. The Jews would not be the ones to defend Jesus as the Hebrew Christ, it was mainly the gentiles and only a handful of Jews because the Jews rejected Him.

About Josephus:

"Josephus was born around 37 AD, and became a Pharisee. He then joined the zealots who rebelled against Roman rule between 66 and 74AD, becoming a leader of their forces in Galilee, and living through the Roman destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. He was captured by the Romans, and would have been executed, but he went over to them.

Josephus became the Roman emperor's adviser on Jewish affairs, and died in about 98 AD. 'Josephus' was his Jewish name, and he took the name 'Flavius' in honour of the family of his imperial sponsor. His 'Jewish War' was largely based on his first-hand experiences. It focuses on the period AD 66 to 73. 'Antiquities of the Jews' covers the whole of history up to AD 66. Out of twenty books, six cover the period from the reign of Herod the Great to AD 66 - i.e. the period when Jesus lived. "

www.facingthechallenge.org...

Josephus, was a Jew and a Pharisee first and foremost. Then he was captured and later embraced Rome. I would not trust one thing this guy says about Jesus or where the Christians in Rome came from. The Jews rejected Jesus as the Christ so of course in working with the Roman Government his accounts would be flavored with a slant that didn't offend the Jews or the Romans.



posted on Jun, 28 2010 @ 12:18 PM
link   
reply to post by JohnPhoenix
 


Once again the information is in the thread.

What we have here is a failure on your part to read the thread, plain and simple. If you don’t want to read the thread, don’t participate in the thread.

Further not only do you fail to break down your posts into properly attributed and sourced quotes of various members utilizing the quotation function on ATS which is what it is for, you also have totally misconstrued for some reason what I am saying, in part likely because you don’t understand the opening post or what the thread is about because you have failed to read it, or because you are trying to frame the other party’s argument in a way that you imagine then allows you to overcome it.

Hint: Read the Thread
Hint: Structure your posts so they are concise, precise and lucid
Hint: Avoid editorial and social commentary regarding what you ‘feel’ are other member’s motivations
Hint: Don’t say you feel someone is saying something, use the quotation function to illustrate what they are saying
Hint: If you have a question ask it respectfully

I have the patience of Job when it comes to people trying to be domineering, but it is absolutely vital you read the thread to participate in it productively.

Thanks.



posted on Jun, 28 2010 @ 12:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
reply to post by JohnPhoenix
 


First before I respond to your latest post, the way you lay them out is positively tortured. If you intent to quote other members learn to use the quotation function on ATS, not only so you honestly display what the other poster said, verbatim, but so it’s possible to ascertain where one posters words end, and yours begin.

So in addition to asking you once more to read the thread, please also learn the rudiments of ATS.


I will quote the way I choose. there is no ATS rule that I know of that says I cannot use quotes as such: " ".




I just love how you fill your post up with lots of fluff to avoid answering my questions.


Like the thread itself, it appears you only have an interest in reading very specific things, while I have an interest in posting very broad based helpful and informative things. So just like the 80 page thread you now want to participate in without reading, or having the benefit of the knowledge of, you also seem inclined to cherry pick over the very helpful and instructive advice that will help you to positively interact productively on this thread.


Hogwash.. again, I asked you specific things about a few of your statements only. There is no need for me to read the whole thread for something you can simply answer.



This is not a on the 12th of July the World Will End Thread from a attack of genetically mutated killer whales.

This is a thread that has attracted some of the brightest and most scholarly and learned minds on ATS.

It’s full of a vast array of very helpful knowledge and sources to even more knowledge on a lot of very pertinent things, that many members have found positively helpful and worth their time in reading.

Hint: There is a reason why many members enjoy my posts and threads.




Prove it. I have read other historians accounts about Jesus's and his life and they do line up with what Christians says about Him. To say that we only have the account of Josephus is absurd..


I imagine you have, however what I can’t ascertain is who those historians were or what source(s) of information that they used.

If 20 historians are all using the same source of information, and that source is controlled by Rome, then no, you don’t have 20 independent accounts; you have 20 different people writing the same story utilizing the same source.

Further were they presenting real history, or where they promoting an idea and agenda in regard to history. In other words what was the agenda and point of their writings, as if they were commercial writings, they had to have a commercial hook.

So once again here we have a person obsessed with sources, who doesn’t even have the propensity, or inclination or capability of providing their own sources, that they have used to substantiate their own world view.


I don't need sources. I am not making claims. only asking where you got your information.



Instead what you are presenting is an argument based on ’20 people’ who are not named, from 20 books that are not named, that supposedly in your estimation have imparted some ‘valid’ level of knowledge, where because you now feel a certain way, and are willing and desirous to say you now feel a certain way, we are all supposed to feel that way too, even though we have no idea how you arrived at that conclusion.

So while we have no chance to read the 20 unnamed books and authors, you have every chance to read the thread to get all the sources involved in it!

Please be aware that all you are doing is what you are errantly accusing others of doing, even though others are not doing that.

All my sources are listed throughout the thread, you have yet to provide one for any of your opinions.


The above is irrelevant to the simple things I asked you. You did not say what your sources were for the few things I asked you about, or I would not have asked where you got them.. just saying you got them from Rome, is not an answer.




Your right. I didn't read the whole thread 79 pages plus. I did not mean to say I had. I meant to say, - My questions were based on your original posts that should have contained all the info needed. Since they did not, I felt reading the rest of the thread was just a waste of time.


Your posts talk a lot about your feelings; this is ATS not a psychoanalyst office.

Your feelings are neither scientific, scholarly or rooted in anything similar.

Read the thread!




What about Tacitus?


What about him? Pulling names from a hastily scanned historical piece is not a precise indicator that you know anything about Tacitus, since you have no specific question(s) in regards to any of his writings.

The thread is an intellectual discussion on a conspiracy, not a place to pretend pseudo intellectualism based on feelings is intellectual, and once again if you have a real intelligent question, I will be happy to answer it.


Irrelevant. I asked you about Tacitus because you said there were no other historians accept for Josephus. I was showing you there were others. You say, " Pulling names from a hastily scanned historical piece" So, now you talking about YOUR feelings? I didn't get his name from any such source. I have real a lot from him and about him over many years.

I did ask you to reference a book called Church in History.




What makes you think the real Christians from Britannia's "Christ" was not a Jew? You give no sources. You say they were druids, but they could have been converts to Christianity. If they didn't believe in Jesus as the Christ and him being Hebrew.. then just what did they believe.. Where did their Christ come from?

Where did I say the real Christians worshipped a figure called Christ? What I said is the real Christian Sect hailed from Britannia, I did not say that the sect had any form of worship of an individual named Christ.


You said, " Yet there was a problem, what to do about the real Christians? While they were relatively small in numbers in Rome, and influential as they were all slaves, and originally came from a remote part of Britannia it would do little good to have any who could actually deny that their God Christ was not from Jerusalem or attached in any way to the Hebrews. " 3rd and 4th line.

You also say, " Of Rome’s many slaves imported into the Empire were a small but growing group of slaves from Britannia
whose Druid sect worshiped a figure called Christ."

So, How you can just now say you never claimed the people who were Christians from Britannia didn't worship a figure called Christ is way beyond me.. it's in your own words.



What I did say is that Jesus Christ is patterned off of Julius Caesar.

Jesus Christ = Julius Caesar
Judas = Brutus
The 12 Disciples = The 12 Lictors
Jesus died on the cross for your sins = Caesar died on the Senate Floor for your sins.

The similarities between the Christ Character and their attributes and Caesar’s are myriad and undeniable.


Well that's your opinion but I didn't ask about that and is therefore irrelevant.



What was the original Druid religion based on? That would be the one wiped out and obscured by Rome that you want all the details on from what Internet site?


I am not asking about the Druid religion. I am asking about the people you claim were Christians from Britannia who were also Druids. I want to know where you got the notions that they didn't believe their Christ came from Jerusalem or was a Hebrew.

Because you say, " While they were relatively small in numbers in Rome, and influential as they were all slaves, and originally came from a remote part of Britannia it would do little good to have any who could actually deny that their God Christ was not from Jerusalem or attached in any way to the Hebrews.

You say, " Of Rome’s many slaves imported into the Empire were a small but growing group of slaves from Britannia
whose Druid sect worshiped a figure called Christ."



If you want to learn more about the Christ Sect and Britannia I suggest once again you either read the thread or use Google or visit a Library as there is a tremendous amount of information out there on that.

Once again the thread is not a religious thread, and once again, all this has been touched upon extensively in the thread you ‘feel’ you would not be well served by reading.

One of the problems though with not reading the thread is you are obviously having a very hard time even comprehending precisely what I did say, which is only compounded by you not properly using the quote function and your inability to frame lucid arguments as a result.


Hogwash. I should not need to read a whole 78 page thread to understand a few simple things you said in the beginning.



You seem to be suffering from insisting people live up to some imaginary standard you have for others, that you don’t seem capable of meeting yourself.




Where do you get this info? Do you think the Romans killed or captured all the Jews or made them all flee the city? "


You might really want to READ THE THREAD!




I find all of these things very highly unlikely. Christians developed in many of the cities around the Mediterranean and they were commonly traveling to Rome and other places. If I cannot trust the truth in these things you claim, then why should i take the rest of your post at face value?


Sources? What are those sources, where do they come from? Rome!


You didn't fly to Rome and dig them up. You either got them off the internet or from books. I ask you.. what are your sources for this specific information?

Where do you get the idea the Jerusalem was devoid of Jews after the Romans marched?






[edit on 28-6-2010 by JohnPhoenix]



posted on Jun, 28 2010 @ 12:58 PM
link   
reply to post by JohnPhoenix
 


Once again the questions you have asked have already been asked and answered in the thread.

You have asked for a source, the thread is your source for the answers that you have failed to read that have already been provided.

Once again your inability to master your own emotions and 'feelings' in how you interact is not to your credit.

Rome in fact rules through default because of the fact that most people can not master their own emotions and feelings.

So it doesn't matter how many times you ask the same questions or how tersely or how rudely, since you will in fact get the same answer.

Read the thread!

The answers you are looking for are in the thread. That is the whole purpose of threads.

You want sources, a whole slew of sources are listed in the thread, don't be to frightened or too lazy to go looking for them, in fact you might be delightfully surprised what all you learn when you do.

Which now leads us to our next musical intermission with a song appropriately dedicated to your particular malady!




You can't always get what you want, but if you try reading the thread you will find out you can get what you purport to need, which evidently you must not need to badly, since you refuse to read the thread to get it!




You didn't fly to Rome and dig them up. You either got them off the internet or from books. I ask you.. what are your sources for this specific information?


Once again had you read the thread you would know that I have travelled the world extensively as part of a former profession I was once engaged in. Yes I have been to Rome and travelled extensively throughout Italy and the region, and no I do not limit my research regarding this and other conspiracies to the Internet and Books.

In fact I am preparing for yet another trip to the region in relation to this conspiracy. You really are just making yourself look foolish by your refusal to read the thread.

Please read the thread.

Thanks for posting!



[edit on 28/6/10 by ProtoplasmicTraveler]



posted on Jun, 28 2010 @ 03:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
Well in all fairness your Avatar Picture does have very mirthful and mischievous eyes!


Raffi WILL be pleased.



Religion is often interjected into the political process and by politicians in their policy initiatives and sales pitches for them.

So no, Americans are not free from religion, elements and aspects of it are imposed constantly on everyone, agnostic, atheist, and congregants and members of the laity alike.


No kidding!


Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

www.usconstitution.net...


This means that NO person should be deprived of a government position based on their religious beliefs. Indeed, in the Oath of Office lies this gem:


I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.

www.usconstitution.net...


'Swearing' or 'affirming' covers both the religious (mono/theist) and atheist nicely. Often, people refer to the 'Seperation of Church and State'. This actually does not exist within the US Constitution. However, there is Jefferson's 1802 mention of a 'wall'after the Constitution was written:


Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his god, [the people, in the 1st Amendment,] declared that their legislature should make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of separation between church and state*.

www.usconstitution.net...

(*bolding mine)

in 1785, Jefferson also managed to get this act passed:


... no man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested, or burthened in his body or goods, nor shall otherwise suffer, on account of his religious opinions or belief; but that all men shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintain, their opinions in matters of religion, and that the same shall in no wise diminish, enlarge, or affect their civil capacities.

www.usconstitution.net...


What a troublemaker, eh? The constitutional wrangling and challenges against this continue to this day. For instances I would give you the the Pledge of Allegiance which includes the words 'under God' and Alabama judge Roy Moore's woodcarving of the Ten Commandments in his courtroom.

Some states agreed, others not so much. So, why is this such a contentious issue? Simply because certain religious factions will brook no controls over their powers. They (pick the religious sect you prefer)want to have a place in the highest offices of the government (to which they may readily aspire) but not without the exclusion of all other beliefs systems. It rankles them that even different Christian sects may hope to attain such powers. Woe betide a Mormon or Jehova's Witness whom may attempt to hold office. It's bad enough when a Catholic becomes President as far as the Baptists are concerned. Imagine if a Muslim tried.

Where are we today, then? I'd say the same place as the Roman Empire was 2000 years ago:


The challenge of forging a society from diverse peoples is not unique to modern America. Almost 2,000 years ago, the Roman empire spread onto three continents and held more than one-fifth of the Earth's population. Rome allowed its diverse peoples to practice their own religions as long as they also made offerings to Roman gods. People of most religions agreed to this arrangement. Jews and Christians couldn't*.

www.crf-usa.org...

(*bolding mine)

...and they still can't.

The Roman Empire never really 'fell' completely, it just spread itself throughout Europe, points in the far east and westward into the Americas. The 'Holy' Roman Empire continues to this day and still has it's power in Rome. The Protestant faiths are 'spin-off's' who have, by various degrees, set themselves against it. However, none will abide the existence of the other any more than the Orthodox did the Arians in 300-400 AD. They set upon each other mercilessly then and are today only restricted by the laws set upon them by a government designed to keep Jefferson's 'Wall' in place.



There is something real that is fundamentally wrong with out world, the disparity between the haves and the have not, the disparity between the power of the masses and the State, the lack of opportunity and real freedom from a system of Corporate Governance with hundreds of thousands of rules to regulate everything to the State’s profit, advantage and control.

As the ongoing situation in the Gulf of Mexico displays we have reached a point where we are now literally killing the very planet and all other forms of life through the gluttonies of Corporate hording and State controls, and a never ending desire to profit off of the leverage of hording resources in such a way that create such a disparity.

We need to rethink, there may in fact not be much time left for us to do that.


Quite.

It's amazing that a country like Canada would spend billions on protecting a few elites for a 3-day G8/20 confab which just HAD to be located in the center of its largest city. Pure egomania, if you ask me. Imagine having it in some out-of-the-way place and just flying in the bigshots? Do you think it might deter the Black Bloc from attempting a violent protest?

Don't even get me going on corporatism.
They are the new Roman Legions and it's captains rise to become the new emporers.



posted on Jun, 28 2010 @ 04:08 PM
link   
My 2 cents on freedom from religion / separation of church and state.

In my opinion - - the strength lies in the law suits won and precedent set over the years.

Still working on "Pledge of Allegiance" - - which never should have been changed in the first place.

Being from that era - I remember when it happend. It was a time when the government said JUMP - and people JUMPED. It was also a time when the Government "owned" your school and medical records. If you wanted to see your kids school records - you had to sue the government. Can you believe that people accepted that - - and believed it was the governments right?

Still following the most important and best thread I've ever encountered.

[edit on 28-6-2010 by Annee]



posted on Jun, 28 2010 @ 06:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Annee
 


I think what’s most important to remember about the fearful McCarthy Era years throughout the 50’s and early 60’s is that during the height of the Cold War and the ‘fight’ against/for communism is that God or in particular the Communists being “Godless” was a central part of the rallying cry.

In fact every inroad religion has made in increasing its power and incorporation within the state has coincided with two things, a war, where the religious are offered concessions within the power structure and more stature in exchange for supporting the war, and just as ominously expanded powers for the Federal Government to go along with it at the same time.

So despite it’s supposed lofty principles what we see right on up through today is the religious and especially the religious right, famously supporting war and death and destruction or bitter enmity in the case of the Cold War, and the people being robbed of liberties as the religious sell out politically in order to gain more power and prestige for their institutions and thinking.

When you actually look back at the history of the changes in the currency and the pledge and so many other things regarding religious inroads into state that is always the reoccurring theme, motivation and outcome, more power for the organized religions and more prominence for God, and more power for the State in exchange for religions being granted more stature and power within the system of governance.

So when you add the two together, religion and state, what you have is a deadly set of near twins, who basically enhance one another’s power and stature often for deadly effect, and always at the expense of the pre-existing system and the citizens at large.

This truly demonstrates just why religion is so attractive to the state, as well as religion’s never ending hunger along with the state’s to grow in stature and power regardless of what the citizens actually want or what is actually good for the citizenry.

As a result State corrupts religion with a lot of notions of intolerance and war and violence and destruction, and religion corrupts the State with a lot of notions of blind obedience and unquestioning allegiance and submission.

That Rome would have chosen Christianity developed on the Judaic principles of religious intolerance including divide and conquer infighting amongst rival sects to become the ‘State’s’ religion, effectively creates an environment where religion is always anxious to make important concessions to the State for more power and notoriety and prestige, but is never actually in the position to truly rival or challenge the state because of the frictional and non-cohesive nature of the major Christian Sects.

Masqua is brilliantly focused in a very scholarly way and trying to keep this very important aspect of ‘Roman Life’ in focus as the control and exploitation mechanism it truly has been throughout history.

I do thank you, and he, and all the other great members who have been following along with the thread, we have covered a lot of territory over the past couple months in regards to many of the working mechanisms and logistics of the conspiracy.

I remain committed as always to actively pursuing more information and the conspiracy both here on ATS and out in the physical world.

Thanks for posting my friend.


[edit on 28/6/10 by ProtoplasmicTraveler]



posted on Jun, 28 2010 @ 07:55 PM
link   
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler
 


To be perfectly honest I sincerely doubt if those in power have any form of religion or worship other than to themselves. Religion is a means to establish chasms within society and allow us to be more easily controlled by causing us to distrust our fellow man.

As well as giving us all the belief that we are all dangerous mokeys and may at any moment molest, rape, kill or steal from our fellow man. We believe we cannot trust each other because we can't tell the difference between a good person and a bad one. So we avoid stopping to help each other. Or saying hello to strangers.

If we as humanity decided to look out for one another we could easily render TPTB helpless. They make a profit out of selling us food, water, clothing and shelter. These are basic needs! How can you make humanity struggle for the basic things they need to survive! Its ridiculous. They probably laugh at us every month when we pay our utility bills. But we allow it to happen. Instead of demanding that these things be nationalized and taking some tax money out of the oversized war machine to pay for it.

Hopefully that all makes sense. Its been a long day.



posted on Jun, 28 2010 @ 08:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by dbloch7986
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler
 



If we as humanity decided to look out for one another we could easily render TPTB helpless. They make a profit out of selling us food, water, clothing and shelter. These are basic needs! How can you make humanity struggle for the basic things they need to survive! Its ridiculous. They probably laugh at us every month when we pay our utility bills. But we allow it to happen. Instead of demanding that these things be nationalized and taking some tax money out of the oversized war machine to pay for it.

Hopefully that all makes sense. Its been a long day.


dbloch7896, You make perfect sense



posted on Jun, 28 2010 @ 08:14 PM
link   
reply to post by dbloch7986
 


Yes it makes perfect sense, and I do believe the Powers that Be often scratch their heads in regards to their good fortune about just how docile and superstitious we truly are.

I do agree with you, I doubt the Kings and leading Politicians and Elites have any use for religion or faith, beyond as a control mechanism to propagate to expand their power, control and influence.

I think when you take a real long hard look at the world, that what you see is that if there is a divine ultimate spiritual source it either takes no sides or has not the freedom to intercede with freewill.

What could the Pelicans of the Gulf States have done that earned a cruel languishing death in toxic sludge and oil?

People on both sides of violent conflicts die, and natural as well as man made disasters kill and harm the religious and faithful as often as they do the non-religious and non-spiritual as well as creatures of all other kinds.

I think like you, that our rulers are certainly intelligent enough to see, that no, God is not running around striking anyone down with thunderbolts and lightening and that they have free reign to do what ever it is that they can get away with.

Clearly when we go back to the Ten Commandments and see it is a document that promotes slavery, war, and excessive taxation, and harsh laws, and harsher penalties, what we see is not a God or divine spiritual presence talking but a Government and a Business Entity that wants to promote the idea that something more powerful than they and not mortal, wishes for these things and it is pleasing to it.

So no, I don’t see the rulers and elite buying into the faith based belief system, of any kind, just using it as a tool to their own advantage.

As always thanks for posting my friend, and I hope you have a pleasant and refreshing rest in store for you soon.



posted on Jun, 28 2010 @ 08:16 PM
link   
reply to post by sweetliberty
 


He does, and clearly the masses are not served well by having the resources of the world held and horded in such few hands, and it is something that is going to have to be rectified and changed if we are to ever know true prosperity, equality and peace.

Groovy new avatar too!



posted on Jun, 28 2010 @ 08:21 PM
link   
I have been reading and making notes--only thru page 10 so far. Wanted to read it all so I wouldn't duplicate someone else' info. However..that may be a long time, so will comment in part now.

You mentioned giving up our power...Yes, we do that any time we join a group. We then become part of the group mind and together we direct where our power goes. Usually to whoever is leading the group. Join in Prayer... yeah, but really our power here does not go to any God.

My advice to everyone --Never join a group. You may visit and enjoy, but Never Join.

As I think about this world power structure, I really have to wonder exactly who or what is at the Top. I see the Vatican as a group of old men who are mere figure heads. ]
Then there are the Jesuits - now they are a powerhouse. It was they who planted themselves in every country the world over. It is they who set up Universities all over the world.
But still....how exactly was it that they were organized. Who or what guided them, and who do they answer to today?

It may be a good time to review those controversail Protocols of Zion.
Did the Jesuits write them? In the biginning of this document there is a description of s Snake slowly making its way thru the world, encircling and conquering. We cannot say that this belong soley to the Jews. I suspect a hidden group who controls Rome, the Jews and Islam, as well as the leadership of other religions in the world.

As to these Treaties.....what would happen if any country just chose to ignore them?
Sorry thing is all the worlds leaders from King/President?Emperor or whatever, as well as all the lesser governmental authorities are all memebers of one of the "secret" and not so secret, ususally Men's organizations; Masons, Knights of Columbus, and even Rotarians, etc.
They are all bonded to groups both by Comradship and Oath.

I think history has shown that anyone who dares to think for himself and use the power of his office to break away usually has an unfortunate aaccident.

There is a load of info in Avro Manhattan's book, "Vatican Billions".
It is on line- all of it.:
www.cephasministry.com...

As to the Early Christian church and its sexual inagry - its as bad as it can get. Most people have the ability to look and not see.
www.flickr.com...

www.beyond-the-pale.org.uk...
Someone mentioned terraforming of Mars. Is the red color of Mars Iron/Rust?
I don't think I ever read what it is. I read somewhere that Earth was terraformed by the implantation of Microbes that ate the rust thus releasing Oxygen.



posted on Jun, 28 2010 @ 08:32 PM
link   
reply to post by OhZone
 


Thanks for posting and I understand there is a lot of thread to go through.

80 ATS Pages is the rough equivalant of a 2800 page book!

So many posters have brought a lot of great information to the thread throughout the thread and I feel it really is worth the read as a result of that.

The Jesuits certainly play an interesting role, and it would not surprise me if the Catholic Hostiles, Pensiones and Weigh Stations that the flood of illegal immigrants into the U.S. overnight and eat at for free along the route are run by Jesuits.

I think what is most important to keep in mind about the Jesuits is the fact that they pay a particular emphasis to education.

If you can control what people are taught on a fundamental level you can control for the most part how people behave and react on a fundamental level too.

You are then after all the entity teaching them how to do that, and presenting the perspective and choices to them for that.

The Vatican in my humble opinion is simply a front for the wealth of Patrician Rome, the elites, who have continued to amass land and resources since the beginning of the empire.

My research leads me to believe it is not the top of the Roman Power Structure, but simply the public image Rome wants the world to have of it, as a benign religious institution interested in humanity and helping it through religion.

Not only does it make a perfect front it turns a tidy little profit all on its own from donations and renting and leasing it's property.

I do believe as laid out in the plan for a one world government to mimic biblical philosophy that the Vatican will be done away with, and we are starting to see what might be the beginning of that, as in the past couple of days Court Actions in both the Netherlands and the United States have taken unheard of in the past confrontational stances to limit the Vatican and it's churches immunity from the Laws of the Land they operate in.

We may very well be entering the final phase of a plan thousands of years in it's completion.

Thanks for posting.



posted on Jun, 28 2010 @ 08:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
reply to post by JohnPhoenix
 


Once again the questions you have asked have already been asked and answered in the thread.

You have asked for a source, the thread is your source for the answers that you have failed to read that have already been provided.

Once again your inability to master your own emotions and 'feelings' in how you interact is not to your credit.

Rome in fact rules through default because of the fact that most people can not master their own emotions and feelings.

So it doesn't matter how many times you ask the same questions or how tersely or how rudely, since you will in fact get the same answer.

Read the thread!

The answers you are looking for are in the thread. That is the whole purpose of threads.

You want sources, a whole slew of sources are listed in the thread, don't be to frightened or too lazy to go looking for them, in fact you might be delightfully surprised what all you learn when you do.

Which now leads us to our next musical intermission with a song appropriately dedicated to your particular malady!




You can't always get what you want, but if you try reading the thread you will find out you can get what you purport to need, which evidently you must not need to badly, since you refuse to read the thread to get it!




You didn't fly to Rome and dig them up. You either got them off the internet or from books. I ask you.. what are your sources for this specific information?


Once again had you read the thread you would know that I have travelled the world extensively as part of a former profession I was once engaged in. Yes I have been to Rome and travelled extensively throughout Italy and the region, and no I do not limit my research regarding this and other conspiracies to the Internet and Books.

In fact I am preparing for yet another trip to the region in relation to this conspiracy. You really are just making yourself look foolish by your refusal to read the thread.

Please read the thread.

Thanks for posting!



[edit on 28/6/10 by ProtoplasmicTraveler]


Let me ask you something. If there were No Thread.. and you just had your original post.. Would you then be able to answer the questions?

Rudely? I have not been rude but adamant. You Sir are Rude, presuming to tell another person how to quote, or how to speak.

Go re-read your replies to me.. They are dripping with Egotism, and self importance, are presumptuous and condescending.

Other people see it too. I have lot of u2u's from people warned me about you. Apparently, you have shown this behavior to more than just me and on many occasions.

How Dare You Sir.

I give up. I believe you made up those things to further your wild claims. Nothing else makes sense.

You simply protest too much.



posted on Jun, 28 2010 @ 09:29 PM
link   
reply to post by JohnPhoenix
 


Once again read the thread!

I am not interested in your feelings or opinions on a bulk of work you refuse to read.

The questions you have asked have been asked and answered many times before.

The thread is your source, for more information regarding sources.

Do you really imagine there is nothing of interest or importance in 80 pages of posts and replies? Do you really imagine that over 330 people have flagged the thread and as many have contributed to it, that they have not asked and added things worth reading?

For all you know Pope Benedict weighed in on page 37 and confirmed the whole conspiracy and thanked me for posting it.

For all you know Queen Elizabeth weighed in on page 53 and confirmed the whole conspiracy and thanked me for posting it.

The truth is you have no idea what's been shared in the thread you refuse to read, and your refusal to just read the thread has now taken up three tedious pages of responses that really don't need to be occuring and wouldn't be occuring if you JUST READ THE THREAD.


This thread is an ATS Big-Thread with 1595 replies, and subject to more strict moderation. Please stay focused. Stay on-topic. Minimal or off-topic posts and T&C violations are subject deletion and/or a warning.


As I have kindly stated before numerous times, read the thread, if you have genuine and honest questions please ask them after having read the thread.

Thanks.



[edit on 28/6/10 by ProtoplasmicTraveler]



posted on Jun, 28 2010 @ 11:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
reply to post by JohnPhoenix
 


Once again read the thread!


If I were you I would have given up a long time ago!

I was in Las Vegas this weekend. Coincidentally, when I arrived my friends were at Caesar's Palace. I thought I would share. I thought it was appropriate.

I find it interesting that Caesar's Palace was also the Casino featured in the ever popular "The Hangover" movie.

It is sad that so many people have died to feed the ever growing insatiable hunger the Romans have for power. As if they didn't have enough already! It's ridiculous.

It is not human nature to be uncaring and callous towards each other. Human nature is actually the opposite. It is thousands of years of careful conditioning that has brought us to where we are today.

Proto, I have a deep admirationg and respect for your uncanny ability to use the English language. Let's just hope you'll be as good at speaking Latin when the time comes.

You're a brilliant man. I hope you publish a book on this soon. I wish I could travel with you to Rome. I've always wanted to see that city.



posted on Jun, 29 2010 @ 02:27 PM
link   
Awesome work with this post very very enlightening!!

Thanks!



posted on Jun, 29 2010 @ 03:59 PM
link   
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler
 



Once again read the thread! I am not interested in your feelings or opinions on a bulk of work you refuse to read. The questions you have asked have been asked and answered many times before. The thread is your source, for more information regarding sources.


I find it extremely interesting when someone chooses to look the other way only to maintain their perception of reality. It is a dynamic that I have been looking into and there are some very good sources to be found on this topic right here on ATS. Even when the conspiracy is right in front of us all and the evidence is all around us. Remember this little bit of information right from the Club Of Rome website?


Systems Integration



As work proceeds on the five clusters, a parallel effort will focus on developing a better conceptual and practical understanding of the world systems within which they are linked and embedded. This will help to understand the linkages between trends, issues and actions and to identify the drivers of global change. The Programme will in this way recognize the immense complexity of world affairs. A dedicated research network will focus on the issue of systems integration, including systems thinking and systems linkages and systems dynamics modelling. These networks will be supported by the Secretariat and accessed through the Club's website. In late 2010 it is planned that the concluding "International Forum of the Club of Rome" will be held to integrate the final outputs of the expert meetings, of the research networks and of the related activities by all the elements of the Club and its partner organizations, leading to coherent conclusions and recommendations and to a major Final Report.


www.clubofrome.org...

The whole theory you have laid out can be found in the literature and programs that this little club promotes. It is right there for us all to see. I can't wait for that final report they are talking about.

On another note I found an interesting article. It seems you're not the only one who see this plan unfolding. The author of this article does a very good job of presenting his case for a diabolical cabal of world leaders who are consolidating and controlling world resources. In my opnion the author sees the plan but he still doesn't see the whole picture. How far back this really goes.


Agenda 21 and How It Will Affect You



Sustainable development focuses on limiting man’s use of natural resources to those amounts that the environment is able to supply indefinitely. Sounds really neat, doesn’t it? After all, who is not in favor of fresh air, clean water, and healthy environments? Unfortunately, it is the perfect cover for a diabolical plan by a group of wealthy elite to rule the earth for their own gain. It is all about power and control at the expense of our personal freedoms. They are intent on taking over the planet, but first they needed to destabilize, and then destroy, the United States of America. That is the Cloward-Piven strategy that Obama and the progressive left are using to ruin America’s economy, destroy our middle class, and put a stranglehold on our energy grid. The primary moving force is the Club of Rome. Over the years the list of its members has included ex-presidents, prime ministers, kings, queens, diplomats, and billionaires. Its membership roster reads like a “who’s who” of the world’s movers and shakers. It includes U.N. bureaucrats, scientists, economists, and business leaders from around the globe. George Soros and Mikhail Gorbachev are among the current members. At the U.N. Summit at Rio in 1992, the Conference Secretary-General, Maurice Strong, said, “Isn’t the only hope for this planet that the industrialized civilization collapses? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about? Current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class—involving high meat intake, the use of fossil fuels, electrical appliances, home and workplace air-conditioning, and suburban housing—are not sustainable.” Club of Rome member George Soros said, “America, as the center of the globalized financial markets, was sucking up the savings of the world. This is now over. The time has come for ‘a very serious adjustment’ in American’s consumption habits.” We will be forced to cut back on fossil fuel consumption. Forced to cut back on water usage. Forced to give up our property. Forced to eat less. Forced to warm or cool our homes less. Forced to give up driving. Forced to give up these, and many other things that we currently take for granted. It’s all part of “The Plan”.


______beforeitsnews/news/88/251/Agenda_21_and_How_It_Will_Affect_You.html



new topics

top topics



 
607
<< 77  78  79    81  82  83 >>

log in

join