It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Vatican Emerges From WikiLeaks As A Key Player On Global Scene

page: 10
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in


posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 09:15 AM
Well I am going to go look for that section from Proto's topic, wish me luck.

edit on 093131p://bTuesday2010 by Stormdancer777 because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 09:17 AM
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler

The most secretive diplomatic and military communications are highly encrypted, and have been since encryption first started being used in the form of ciphers like the famous Enigma cypher the Germans were using during World War II that the British cracked early on.

That certainly is a good point, makes sense.

posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 09:18 AM
reply to post by Stormdancer777

Do you think the Vatican wields as much weight as it once did?

Contractually it owns and governs the entire world except for a handful of rogue nations, it is more powerful than ever.

I am just saying, I don't think it does.

You haven't even begun to think about addressing this issue honestly and you have been dancing around it for eight months now Stormdancer.

Posters that call for violence tend to frighten me.

Violence at best is a temporary solution that the masses have been long trained to resort too, without thought to who ends up controlling the critical infrastructure that feeds humanity, the vital resources that power it and make that possible, and the monetary and banking system that functins as the engine and grease for that distribution is who holds the real power.

This is why revolutions lead no where, because they never deal with the corrupt elements who own and control these things in most cases, just the governments that acted as agents for the people who own and control these things.

Wresting the infrastructure from the very small number of hands that own it, is what is required and that can't be done through violence but only through legal mechanisms that the people agree upon.

Because the banking and infrastructure system is world wide, rebelling in one country will simply result in the kind of embargos Cuba, North Korea, Iraq and Iran have long had to endure.

Here in America because we no longer grow enough food or manufacture enough goods or produce enough energy to sustain us, a revolution only here, would only result in us being starved into submission internationally.

In the end the same people who have long been in charge will remain in charge when the new government becomes aware of it's debts to and contractual obligations and the penalties and hardships for trying to break away from the system.

Because I think education and reformation are needed when it come to,


This is so not about religion, religion is simply a societal construct to order people in managable states of shared concepts and laws, to function as free range slaves to the states and the corporation.

Why you refuse to see this is not about Gods but using God to define a State's Power and to enslave people to it is beyond me.

posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 09:23 AM
reply to post by TribeOfManyColours

The whore of Babylon..Not only figuratively but directly. We have had a black president the next will be a woman (goddess)

Many will begin jumping on the Palin boat this year...Hillary is too obvious.

posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 09:36 AM
I found this one that I posted, but I am getting close,

Article 52 of the European Constitution

ARTICLE I-52: Status of churches and non-confessional organizations:
1. The Union respects and does not prejudice the status under national law of churches and religious associations or communities in the Member States.
2. The Union equally respects the status under national law of philosophical and non-confessional organisations.
3. Recognising their identity and their specific contribution, the Union shall maintain an open, transparent and regular dialogue with these churches and organisations.

- Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe, October 2004


In February 2002, with the accession of ten additional countries to the European Union approaching, a new body, the Convention on the Future of Europe, was charged with drafting a constitution that would define the rules for political life in an EU of 25 or more member states. The Convention was composed of a total of 105 delegates, representing the European Commission, the European Parliament, the governments and parliaments of the 25 countries concerned and nine observers from civil society. After 18 months of work the constitutional draft was submitted to the Council of the European Union (the main decision making body in the EU) for final approval by the governments of the member and accession countries. The Constitution was agreed by the European Parliament in June 2004 and is now awaiting ratification by each of the 25 member states. This will be done either by an act of parliament or through a referendum.

A major source of conflict emerged during the discussions about the new constitution regarding the role and rights of religious entities. The Constitution draft includes a “church” article (Article 52, but Article 51 in previous drafts) which grants significant and unique privileges and rights to religious denominations and makes them exempt from some European laws and regulations. The Catholic church strongly backed these measures. As a result, there was intense lobbying by the Catholic hierarchy throughout the process, including Vatican audiences with high European officials. John Paul II received Valérie Giscard d’Estaing, president of the Convention, Pat Cox, president of the European Parliament, Tony Blair, prime minister of the United Kingdom, Joschka Fischer, German vice-chancellor, and others. He summoned the ambassadors of member states who are accredited to the Holy See to a meeting to inform them of his wish to have certain elements included in the European Constitution. The lobbying was strong at the national level, too, where the national bishops’ conferences used their many formal and informal structures to pressure their governments and their countries’ delegates to advance the church’s concerns.
The Vatican’s Objectives

The Vatican wanted five points to be included in the Constitutional Treaty. The three central ones were:

• The recognition of the “institutional dimension” of religious freedom. The Vatican argued that full religious liberty comprises three dimensions: the individual dimension, namely the right to choose one’s system of beliefs; the collective dimension, or the right to associate with others to live out the precepts of one’s faith; and the institutional dimension, meaning the constitutional recognition that religious faith communities are also political actors in their own right, but in a specific form differing from other actors in civil society. According to the Vatican, the religious dimension embraces the whole range of human preoccupations and lends competence to the church in almost all matters, justifying a specific status, different from other civil society organizations. The main advocate of this point, besides the Vatican, was the German Catholic church, which already enjoys this status at the national level and would like to gain similar status within the EU.
This request was acknowledged in Article 52.

• The recognition of an exemption from European law and regulations that the church considered to violate its teachings. Religious freedom already grants the church the right to administer itself as a faith community, according to its teaching. This new right would institutionalise on a European level an exemption that grants the church the right to implement employment practices without having to comply with European policies and regulations that the church considers a violation of its teaching. This means that Catholic-run or affiliated hospitals, schools and social service projects would not have to respect EU principles and laws on non-discrimination. In the name of “institutional religious freedom” and “subsidiarity” Catholic-affiliated projects could refuse to hire and could fire gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered people, and divorced and re-married people as well. They could also refuse to hire or fire people who publicly express disagreement with church positions on key policy issues, like contraception or abortion. Helmut Kohl, then Christian Democrat chancellor of Germany and an ally of the German bishops, succeeded in overcoming the resistance of the French delegates to have this right recognized and added to the Treaty of Amsterdam, the 1997 compact between the EU member nations outlining the foundations for an expanded EU in the 21st century. The Vatican’s desired language was annexed in Declaration No. 11—the first mention of the church in a European legislative document—and it allows for all organisations recognised as a church or a community of faith or conviction to be exempt from Article 13 of the treaty, which prohibits discrimination on the grounds of religion or sexual orientation. The Vatican sought to have this declaration promoted from an annex to an integral part of the new constitution.
This request was acknowledged in §1 of Article 52.
• The institution of a specific consultative status for the church. This would provide for the Catholic church to be consulted in the pre-drafting stage of legislation on a wide range of matters where the church feels it has expertise and for regular consultations at the highest level of the various EU institutions. The Catholic church wished to have a constitutionally granted voice in state affairs and demanded a permanent liaison office within the European Commission.
This request was acknowledged in §3 of Article 52.

The Catholic church is the only religious community to be represented in Brussels and, like Saudi Arabia, the United States, China or any other foreign country, is represented in person by an ambassador, the apostolic nuncio. Apostolic nuncios represent the Holy See, as a foreign political authority, not only in Brussels but also in each one of the member countries of the EU and of the accession countries as well. And each member country has its own diplomatic relationships with the Roman Catholic church through an ambassador at the Holy See.

The apostolic nuncio to the EU is a member of the Commission of the Bishops’ Conferences of the European Community (COMECE), constituted by the delegates, one per national bishops’ conference, and is the body that seeks to be the institutional church interlocutor of the EU in the context of participatory democracy on the ground of Article 52. This means that, through Article 52, and in the context of participatory democracy, the ambassador of a “foreign country” is claiming the institutionalisation of pre-legislative consultation and a special privileged status within the EU.

Even without the aforementioned provisions, the church already has direct influence within EU institutions. Several European Commission officials regularly consult the COMECE when drafting legislative documents, as church agencies do have expertise on areas such as migration. In addition, it has become established procedure for COMECE to meet with the representative of the government that holds the rotating European presidency to exchange information and present the church’s concerns.

There is also quite a bit of information that would fit in well with this topic.

posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 09:41 AM

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
reply to post by Stormdancer777

Contractually it owns and governs the entire world except for a handful of rogue nations, it is more powerful than ever.

Curious as to which are the rogue nations?

Also, I'd like to ask a quick question which is likely completely off topic, so please forgive me and reply U2U if that's more appropriate. It requires posting a pic, which is why I didn't U2U you.

I was recently in Rome for the first time (I live driving distance away). Of course, we 'did' the Vatican on the first day. In the Basilica, I was surprised to see the main (?) altar didn't look particularly Roman/Catholic - if there is such a thing, but to me looked Asian (Hindu would be my best guess).

It struck me as very strange and whilst reading this thread, it has been niggling at me to be mentioned so I'm going to indulge the impulse. Again, sorry if it's completely irrelevant. Do you have any comment?

Oops, it's not that simple to get a picture embedded and I have to move on, so here is a link to someone else's upload:
edit on 28/12/10 by RogerT because: wrong image link

posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 09:50 AM

Originally posted by salty_wagyu

Originally posted by Faiol
Vatican is an organization that have the objective to profit

congrats Christians, you keep fat guys rich

There's nothing Christian about Catholicism.

well, who cares, if the message was understood, thats what matters

posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 10:04 AM

OH! MY! GOD!, that was tedious,!

give this post a star
posted on 043131p://bTuesday2010 @ 04:24 AM this post
OK Proto, finally got some free time this morning and did some digging around. I know I've just been attacking elements of your story, but I never claimed the entire theory was false. I found something very interesting below and hopefully it shows you that you can justify many elements of this theory without relying on false claims about Masonic institutions and false ties with Caesar's etc. This should add to the theories with the Vatican City (Rome) and its ties to the United States.

Well, I was looking at some examples of ecclesiastical (canon/church) law as if there were proof of any 'conspiracy' with Rome then surely something would be hinted at in the legal frameworks. I came across this interesting page while digging, it didn't just hint at Vatican control, it pretty much outlined it word for word.

This is an extract from Ecclesiastical Law Volume 1, Article II, titled Of American Canon Law, or of the National Canon Law of the United States which was published in 1895. Here is an extract I've typed out for convenience of reading, I've linked the original document below:

Note: Underlined in brackets are my notes, additions to the original transcript.

By the national eccl. law of this country we understand the various derogations from the "jus commune," or the different customs that exist among the churches in the United States, and are sanctioned or tolerated by the Roman Pontiff. We say, "are sanctioned or tolerated by the Roman Pontiff"; for, as was seen, no national law can become legitimate except by at least the tacit or legal consent of the Pope. Again, the "jus particulare" (the justice system/laws) of a nation always remains subject to the authority of the Holy See in such a manner as to be repealable at any time by it. Hence, the jus nationale, or the exceptional ecclesiastical laws prevalent in the United States, may be abolished at any time by the Sovereign Pontiff.

Pages 53-54
(link to the original scanned document)

In other words, the Pope under the power of the Holy See (Roman Catholic Church) can abolish any law within the United States, trespassing over all jurisidctions within the country, from the President to the Supreme Court.

Here it is, it deserves it own topic.

So we can investigate it further.
edit on 103131p://bTuesday2010 by Stormdancer777 because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 10:09 AM
reply to post by RogerT

Yes. Roger they borrowed from past nations and religious cults, that's where I and proto differ I say it started before Rome.

posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 10:11 AM
reply to post by Cherryontop

Proto my friend
I must comment on this :
"I will admit I host vistors from time to time who are not of this dimension. This makes me nothing but a gracious and open minded host, and not a member of a religion or a cult. "

After reading as many of your posts that time and my weary eyes will permit and agreeing and learning SO much from you, this was the one area I was waiting for you to corroborate for me, personally. I felt certain that you had to, on some level, know that there's so much more than meets the ( human) eye. It's reassuring to know that you are aware, and I feel it gives great validity to others who have met with and experienced the same.

One of the things I have remained most mindful over the months is trying to keep exposure of the Roman Conspiracy centered on human legal elements that ‘logical’ minds can actually focus in on as being valid and worthy of exploration, study and consideration.

Many have been anxious to incorporate theocracy but that is an argument obviously no one has won in 2,000 years of trying, it would just lead to the sabotaging of the effort through the same divide and conquer tactics that using a monotheistic system not clearly defined was designed to lead to exploitable divisions through.

Mine is not the first serious attempt at challenging Rome the last was in the early seventies but eventually became all about religion and the legal elements and banking elements that Rome is using were quickly obscured and critical non-religious minds simply ended up seeing it as a ‘theocracy’ debate.

People can best appreciate those things that can be self evidenced, when you start including elements that can’t be self evidenced you loose more and more people who no longer find the tedium of that which can’t be self evidenced worth enduring to on the rare occasion these deflective discussions aren’t taking place discuss the matters of true substance that can be clearly quantified and qualified.

I am doing my level best to not let my effort bog down and fail where others have in the past, but this has for the most part been a huge battle of wills and egos at times that is frankly exhausting at times, but imperative if maximum exposure is going to be attained and a critical mass reached.

I have touched on rare occasion in some other threads on some of the esoteric elements with members like MikeBoyd, Infinite, BigFatFurryTexan, Jackflap and others and have some things to say about this, but the truth is the people who have an understanding and appreciation of these things are so in the minority it risks the alienation of the majority who aren’t familiar with them through self evidence, who then become inclined to throw the baby out with the bath water.

I will eventually do a thread as promised in the Gray Area on the “Other Side” where I will delve into as deeply as people want to go without deflecting away from the main conspiracy.

Some of the best researchers in All Roads Lead to Rome and there are some very diligent and talented ones really have no desire or inclination to delve into these ‘fringe’ areas, and they have been so valuable in their research of the legal and banking aspects that anyone can wrap their mind around I don’t want them to loose interest in their participation.

Eventually though I will have some things to say on the topic, in the appropriate time and forum.

I have read your stance time and time again, and again, I agree that things on earth with humans should be our first priority. I haven't even finished reading your posts on this subject, because this statement you made caught me so off guard. I had to stop mid post to reply to you. It's reassuring to me, and I suspect others that this aspect of life not be dismissed.

As I like to say "Let's just focus on Earth problems" there isn't much point in skipping rungs on a ladder that only end up leaving you exposed to attack from above and below. Tackling things in sequence in a logical progression of importance is key. In World War II the Allies were constantly dropping special forces missions into occupied Europe for hit and run assualts but they knew the key to retaking Europe meant taking it's beaches.

We likewise need to start out by taking and holding the beaches.

I'm not trying to blow smoke here, but if ANYONE here can make a case for how to take back this planet from Rome, you can. You are right, time is running out. But...People will listen to you. People will support you. I will support you, and as I said in a personal message you you almost a year ago when I encouraged you to go bigger, to build a site, etc. I am willing to put my money, energy, efforts, where my mouth is.

I so appreciate all the support and efforts so many members have provided. It’s not always easy and awkward at times being the beneficiary of so much good will and support. I try hard not to let people down and worry constantly about that as I think I have managed to provide a lot of people with some real hope and encouragement on a way out of this mess and retaking our world and making it a much more user friendly and hospitable and peaceful place.

It’s been a huge effort at times; I have committed thousands of pages in writings on the subject that would fill up a couple lengthy books at this point. It’s involved a real sacrifice in time that has involved a real sacrifice in my business and personal life, but I feel the effort is so supremely important I have been willing to gamble and sacrifice those things in the attempt.

I know not everyone is appreciative, or supportive or in agreement, but by and large ATS itself and some of the Moderators and Subject Matter Experts like Masqua and Infinite have been so supportive and helpful that its hard to ignore that ATS reaches such a broad audience, far more many people than a site of my own would or could.

This isn’t a commercial effort for profit for me, as people like Alex Jones and David Icke and others use conspiracy theories to earn a living.

I think such personalities like ATS itself has to use what is at times a compromising business model to attract advertisers and revenues by at times going out on a limb with over sensationalized or poorly researched things to attract viewers.

I prefer to remain focused on just the subject and not the business of a subject.

I think this is the best way to do it, and dividing my efforts between a site of my own that would reach far fewer people, and ATS would dilute my efforts to both.

It could easily lead to accusations that simply would allow critics to say I am in the business of pushing conspiracies that it’s really just all about personal financial gain.

I don’t want anything to detract from this effort, it’s a desperate enough uphill climb against the most powerful entrenched interests in the world as it is.

Not everyone might agree with me, not everyone might believe me, but my motive is pure and simple, I want to make the world a better place, by exposing the real power structure that has made it far less than the ideal place it could be for all of us, to make it a very ideal place for the privilege of a very few at everyone else’s expense.

Let me know how I can be of assistance. I can only tell you that I have known this is what my purpose is here. Not here as in ATS, but here as in now, in this place/space in time.

I think a lot of us feel this 'calling' that compells us to this goal and end, and I think there is a real reason for that, that is fated and destined.

More and more of us are discarding the instilled myths that we as individuals can not make a difference and more and more of us are trying to make a difference.

You are definately doing your part in my humble opinion your posts and words are always honest and sincere, and well intended.

You believe you do have a responsibility that is inherent to you for the state of our shared world, and honestly if we could get everyone to be so honest and responsible and open about this, well the battle would be easy to win.

By setting a fine example you sure are doing your part, one that I am very admiring of and respectful of and grateful for,

Thank you again, for so much. I don't think I could ever do justice in a simple thread post what your time and efforts have meant to me personally, and quite possibly will mean to us collectively.

This is the very awkward part as it is so much easier for most of us to give than receive. What sustains me though honestly is the hope that such goodwill engenders, what troubles me is the resentment it sometimes causes in others who feel my efforts aren’t ‘all that’ or ‘well intentioned’ or ‘accurately reflective of the state of the world’.

It’s a real tightrope high wire precipice to walk, but for what it’s worth I want to change this world so badly and believe it needs changed so badly there is really no risk I won’t take, or scorn I won’t endure, or challenge I won’t try to rise too.

I believe we can do it my friend, I believe we can take down Rome and change the world for the better.

Here at the end with our backs against the wall, in the eleventh hour, I don’t honestly see how we have much choice left but too.

Thanks for everything, and being you!

posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 10:20 AM
reply to post by Stormdancer777

I have to break a bit to do some actual work, but if you are 'honestly' going to research this law you need to start out with a very good and the oldest possible Latin Legal Dictionary you can find.

The Latin words being employed by their strict legal definitions are critical to understanding any legal document where Latin appears.

The Latin is used in part to very specifically difine very real and enforcable concepts and procedures, but because it is a 'dead' and little understood language by the masses to also 'obscure' what is actually being said from the average person.

Most people are going to want to guess at what this law means based on their own perspective and politics and understanding of non legal (discriptive not literal) English.

The Latin Words are the Key to understanding this, and the oldest legal definitions of both the English and Latin being used are critical to understanding this document in the exact same way a Court of Law would look upon it.


posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 10:23 AM
reply to post by Stormdancer777

What I get from this is he, the Pope cannot abolish US law, but can only makes decision regarding the Catholic church within countries, or the US.

posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 10:38 AM
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler

If you start the topic I will participate, but at my age?

Heaven help us all.

I did do a small amount of research on it, so far.

posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 11:38 AM
reply to post by Stormdancer777

As I mentioned without an actual "working" legal dictionary preferably dating to at least the same year of the Law that has the precise legal definitions of the Latin and English used in the document, all in fact you will have is what ever rendering you choose to believe.

It really is that important, because that is precisely what an appellate Judge would in fact do when rendering a decision on the legality of the document and to what degree and how it is enforceable.

In reality it is a proclamation that no law may impinge on the Cannons, as they are used as law.

That any law passed within the United States that impinges on Cannon Law can be struck down. This has nothing to do with religions or churches. This has to do with Cannon Law and it's validity as a form of superseding law that trumps all other laws.

Because religion always factors into your equations you fail to recognize that the Vatican’s extensive business ventures as property owners, renters and landlords, banking and other forms of commerce, are what the Cannons are in large part meant to contractually ensure.

What this law is used for is if any law passed in the U.S. threatens Rome's business ventures and seeks to bypass the Cannons in that regard, that Rome may strike down that law.

Until you decide to separate the 'business of Rome' from the religion of Rome all you are ever going to be doing is saying "I think this means this" based on your views on religion.

Serbsta had wanted to do a thread on this subject and was supposed to be completing some research on this and the Papal Banking relationships with the Rothschild family but seems to have fallen off the face of the earth.

My own research has displayed that in fact U.S. Courts are still using Cannon Law in appellate cases, as an important threshold that must be met in property disputes, and matters of wills. This has not one thing to do with religion but ownership and contractual rights as put forth in the Cannons.

Most law is simply based on precedent, usually with the oldest law that first established legal precedent being the most valid in a Judges eye.

Most of how Rome controls and governs the world is through a series of contracts that give it proprietary rights to property, resources and privileges, which are legal binding instruments.

What this specific law is about is stating Rome's privilege of being able to strike down any law that in any way threatens or seeks to usurp Rome's proprietary rights over land, businesses, and resources, it owns contractually.

Where this differs from most other contractual owners is typically everything Rome owns was originally acquired through decree and not purchase.

In other words, I say it is mine, this law says I can do that, I have laid claim to it, de facto, it belongs to me, this law makes that legal.

You can not make a law to disenfranchise me from that claim and title.

This is what this law is actually about, it has nothing to do with the morality of other religions, or the morality of religion, it has to do with the legality of Rome's claims to ownership and proprietorship.

That nothing legally can supersede those contracts.

The Cannons were written specifically to ensure that. William Penn did very much the same with the Great Law and that is why it is still consulted in appellate cases, because it too in fact can’t be superseded, the English Monarchy did much the same with Crown Law so that it can’t be superseded.

Where these laws come into play is when ever a contractual matter is being contested that is covered by one of these laws, in other words something bequeathed and owned by Rome or it’s agents, William Penn and heirs, or the English Crown here within the United States, and let me tell you all these entities own a great deal of the United States, these laws and not our Constitution governs the resolution of such contractual disputes.

Which is why you are likely to find all of these books in an appellate judge’s chambers, some of them hundreds of years old the law is actually a much more complex thing than you would ‘think’ it is.

posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 11:42 AM
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler

much more complex thing than you would ‘think’ it is.

Oh I know it is complex,

I was wondering how much documentation we could find where the CC controlled American policy?

OH sigh, I don't want to start a topic.
A Brief History of Vatican Foreign Policy

edit on 113131p://bTuesday2010 by Stormdancer777 because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 11:58 AM

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
What this law is used for is if any law passed in the U.S. threatens Rome's business ventures and seeks to bypass the Cannons in that regard, that Rome may strike down that law.

Considering the size and popularity of this thread, it is quite obvious who will be the looser here. As the financial meltdown becomes more telling, governments are going after ALL the loose ends.

posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 12:22 PM

Originally posted by CodeRed3D

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
What this law is used for is if any law passed in the U.S. threatens Rome's business ventures and seeks to bypass the Cannons in that regard, that Rome may strike down that law.

Considering the size and popularity of this thread, it is quite obvious who will be the looser here. As the financial meltdown becomes more telling, governments are going after ALL the loose ends.

I know how the story ends.

posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 12:42 PM
Of course the vatican has always been a key player. If I recall, Pope John Paul II had a significant hand in the Solidarity Movement in Poland that helped Lech Walesa transform Poland to a non-communist state.

Pardon if this was already stated.

PS. Can someone tell me how to get my friggin' avatar to show up? :-)


posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 01:03 PM
reply to post by prexparte

Originally posted by prexparte
Know the inner plan is surfacing and the commoners are beggining to see what is really happening. total population take-over-One World Order, or something more sinister, a demonic takeover. For myself they cant have me, I wont play by their rules and horrific ways. whos with me? how to avoid them?. lastely what do we do now? I think we who oppsoe need to come together before it is to late.

While many have awoke and can see the electronic grid closing in, the rape of the contries
by the Bankstas, which is part of the New World Order plan which is really the Old World Order,
I do have my concerns that many are being led astray when it comes to the next bend in the road.

The nations are at a precipice, and as they teeter on the brink of financial collapse a one world currency awaits.
All the players have called for it, its only a matter of time, and the right moment in the crisis. Then it will happen.

Whether "Alien Disclosure" comes before or after, I wont predict. However, I do think that a manufactured Disclosure will happen, and it is the more sinister event you mention. It possibly is the demonic takeover.

I do agree, we must make plans now or as many of us have said, its never.

Lets keep our resources pooled, share what we know and plan accordingly.


So what is next? That is the question now. We will have to sit back and see how this plays out. It seems that the Vatican and the UN are rallying into position and be prepared for contact and the possible meeting of a new race with humans. Lets look at it realistically, world wide organizations like these two would not hang themselves out there for ridicule unless they have something up their proverbial sleeves and are very sure that the move will be met with results to justify such a controversial policy change of direction.

edit on 28-12-2010 by burntheships because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 01:14 PM

Originally posted by ChinScratcher
Of course the vatican has always been a key player. If I recall, Pope John Paul II had a significant hand in the Solidarity Movement in Poland that helped Lech Walesa transform Poland to a non-communist state.

Pardon if this was already stated.

PS. Can someone tell me how to get my friggin' avatar to show up? :-)


Actually this is one of the most charming stories of Papal Power when John Paul decided he didn't want his native Poland to live under the Communist Yoke.

He met with General Jaruzelski the Polish President and as is customary when heads of state meet the Polish President gave the Polish Pope a oil painting by a local Polish artist of a local Polish Landscape valued at 15.00 USD. The Pope gave the Communist Leader an original Rembrant valued at 3,000,000.00 USD.

This in fact basically amounted to a 3,000,000.00 dollar bribe, to remove the Iron Gloves and let the Solidarity Movement take off.

Welcome to Rome where unlimited wealth can in fact suffice in cases where unlimited military resources from your client states might get a little messy.

Now the Pope in fact wasn't quite so concerned about the other Eastern European Communist nations since well he wasn't from them, but it's reassuring to know that sentiment can play heavily on the heart of a Pope.

Too bad this one was a member of the Nazi Hitler Youth Brigade, ah the fond memories of Jackboots echoing through the streets and the good old days. I wonder what makes him sentimental?

new topics

top topics

<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in