Clinton, Bush, Obama, Hitler....Good enough Papists to deserve a commemorative coin or Vatican hung

page: 2
14
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 12 2013 @ 06:29 AM
link   
reply to post by FlyersFan
 



Dude .. your so called 'facts' aren't facts. It's just a bunch of baloney put out by paranoid Seventh Day Adventists and Jack Chick.


Fact1: Hitler never ex-communicated

Let’s check out the facts put out by a Roman Catholic on a Catholic forum post


Quote:

"Pope Pius XII in 1939 instructed Cardinal Bertram to send a birthday message to Hitler: 'warmest congratulations to the Fuhrer in the name of the bishops and the dioceses in Germany' which was added, 'fervent prayers which the Catholics of Germany are sending to heaven on their altars.' These greetings became a tradition and were sent every April 20th." ["Hitler compared to God/Jesus/Christians", by Jim Walker]

So even after Czechoslovakia, Kristallnaght and the persecution of the opposition, the Jews, those who were born handicapped, etc, the Church send in its "warmest regards".
Quote:

"Pacelli became a crowned Pope on March 12, 1939 (Pius XII). The following month on April 20, 1939, at Pacelli's express wish, Archbishop Orsenigo, the nuncio in Berlin, opened a gala reception for Hitler's fiftieth birthday. The birthday greetings thus initiated by Pacelli immediately became a tradition; each April 20 during the few years left to Hitler and his Reich, Cardinal Bertram of Berlin would send "warmest congratulations to the Fuhrer in the name of the bishops and the dioceses in Germany," to which he added 'fervent prayers which the Catholics in Germany are sending to heaven on their altars'." [Cornwell, John, Hitler's Pope: The Secret History of Pius XII, Viking, 1999, p. 209]

Quote:

Adolf Hitler died a Catholic in good standing within the Catholic Church, was never excommunicated, and was supported by the Vatican even after the war! Rome established and operated an escape route through Italy for former Nazi officials that has become known as the "Vatican Rat Lines" ["Unholy Trinity", by Mark Aarons and John Loftus]

post from this Catholic forum


And this from Roman Catholic Resources. com


Why after 60 years the Vatican has not excommunicated Hitler?
After 60 long years and countless witnesses and evidence of their evil, why the Vatican has not excommunicated Roman Catholic leader Adolf Hitler?
Under considérant Sané Bull (1317 / issued by Pope John XXII (which has never been revoked) permits of deceased persons to be convicted of heresy and after that being excommunicated, including all their assets confiscated . Tens of thousands of people during the past seven one hundred years have been excommunicated and convicted under the law of the Catholic Church.
So why not Hitler? There is absolutely no doubt that Hitler was baptized and confirmed as a Roman Catholic. So why the church refused to excommunicate him, by their own laws long?



"Even today I am not ashamed to say that, overpowered by stormy enthusiasm, I fell down on my knees and thanked Heaven from an overflowing heart for granting me the good fortune of being permitted to live at this time."
Hitler, "Mein Kampf", Vol. 1, Chapter 5


So from Hitler (or the priest’s who wrote Mein Kampf) we hear him offering up a prayer


"But if out of smugness, or even cowardice, this battle is not fought to its end, then take a look at the peoples five hundred years from now. I think you will find but few images of God, unless you want to profane the Almighty."
Hitler, "Mein Kampf", Vol. 1, Chapter 10

Refering to God as the Almighty

"Anyone who dares to lay hands on the highest image of the Lord commits sacrilege against the benevolent creator of this miracle and contributes to the expulsion from paradise."
Hitler, "Mein Kampf" Vol. 2 Chapter 1

FF, it doesn’t sound like he walked away from his Christian (Catholic) faith at all


Catholics today can't distance themselves enough from Adolf Hitler. But that wasn't the case in the 1930's and 40's when he was one of the most powerful men on earth. Germany's Catholics were proud as peacocks to count their Fuerher as one of their own, so long as he was putting Germans back to work, and making them proud of their powerful country, following the period of great economic depression and the humiliating shame they had suffered after their defeat in World War One. Hitler was not only allowed to "get away with murder", he was allowed to conduct mass-murder by the millions. Because Hitler has since been defeated and his villainy has come to be seen for what it was, Catholics now want to believe that their church must have repudiated Hitler in his day. But try as they may to rewrite history, the fact is that once Adolf Hitler came to power in 1933, neither the pope in Rome as leader of the church worldwide, nor the bishops of Germany, ever denied membership or even public access to the sacraments to Hitler himself, nor to the many, many, other Nazi leaders of the Third Reich who claimed membership in the R.C. church.
source



Exiting Whilemshaven church in 1931 a posed picture which Hitler himself used often to show what a good "practicing Catholic" he was.

Spanish dictator Francisco Franco, one of the Catholic churches ‘favourite’ sons, when learning of Hitler’s death:

"Adolf Hitler, son of the Catholic Church, died while defending Christ- ianity. It is therefore understandable that words cannot be found to lament over his death, when so many were found to exalt his life. Over his mortal remains stands his victorious moral figure. With the palm of the martyr, God gives Hitler the laurels of Victory". - Spanish dictator Francisco Franco, (Knight of the Order of Christ) published on the 3rd of May 1945, the day of Hitler's death. (published in "Reforme", July 21, 1945.)


So what information there proving my fact as a fact came from ‘’Paranoid Adventist’s and Jack Chick”
....your shameful

Fact 2: Hitler's stolen treasure of his victims and plundered nations in Vatican Bank
covered in more detail in my most recent reply post to adjensen

Fact 3: Hitler's intimate continual dealings with Catholic clergy all through the war

HITLER'S PRIESTS: Catholic Clergy and National Socialism by Kevin P. Spicer

“Kevin P. Spicer’s deeply researched and deeply disturbing book, Hitler’s Priests, ...is absolutely convincing.... A priest and member of the Congregation of Holy Cross, Spicer has an insider’s grasp of the church’s organization and governance. He has combed through an impressive number of diocesan and government archives to assemble a list of 138 “brown priests,” who were either members of the Nazi party or at least active supporters of the program. His book is devoted to a detailed account of the radical nationalism and virulent anti-Semitism that led these men to believe that they could be followers of both Hitler and Christ.... The question of how representative these brown priests were haunts Spicer’s book.”
— James J. Sheehan, Stanford University, Washington Post “Book World”

“Hitler’s Priests will contribute to the much debated argument of the level of Catholic Church resistance, conformity, and accommodation to the Nazi regime. Spicer’s use of archival materials is almost superhuman. Perhaps the most important element ... is the information that he has managed to unearth on these fairly unknown individual priests.”
— Beth A. Griech-Polelle, Bowling Green State University
source


So I guess Kevin P. Spicer, James J. Sheehan and Beth A. Griech-Polelle all must secretly be paranoid Adventist’s and Jack Chick too huh.....You’re level of ridiculousness is beyond measure and have lost track of reality.






Dozens of documents -- many from parish archives -- include:
* A chillingly dispassionate entry dated Nov. 26, 1942, from the Austrian Bishops' Conference, which skims over the mass deportation of Jews to Nazi death camps by noting that over one year, "33 transports of 1,000 each have gone to Poland." By that time, some bishops were signing off with "Heil Hitler" on official letters and priests were authorized to display the swastika.
* Influential Jesuit Mario von Galli described Jews as "God's murderers" who deserve persecution. In 1940, as Gypsies started joining the Jews on death trains packed to the suffocation point, the Vienna archdiocese urged all parishes to do their utmost to "combat the Gypsy chaos" in the Austrian capital by reporting Gypsies to police.
* The parish newspaper "Erdberger Pfarrblatt" urged Catholics to support Hitler by declaring: "One people -- one Reich -- one Fuehrer -- one God!"
* Rural priest Franz Mandl, in a lectern-thumping speech, called Hitler "the greatest human being" -- one of dozens of priests who were documented praising the Nazi dictator.
* An internal church document blamed Jewish politicians and writers for the decline in pure-race Germanic births.
* A listing of pro-Hitler Austrian clergy staying in or promoted to leading positions after the war. It included Bishop Alois Hudal, who boasted of helping about 50,000 war crimes suspects hide or escape. Among them was Franz Stangl, commander of the Treblinka death camp in Poland, where 800,000 Jews were killed. He was arrested in Brazil after two decades on the run, using a false passport procured through Hudal.
LA Times article - Austrian priests support for Hitler detailed

Add some salt in the wounds...(as Tiso was technically not practising clergy at the time but still important history to be told)


Father Jozef Tiso (13 October 1887 – 18 April 1947) was a Slovak Roman Catholic priest, politician of the Slovak People's Party. Between 1939 and 1945, Tiso was the head[1][2][3][4][5][6] of the Slovak State, a satellite state of Nazi Germany. After the end of World War II, Tiso was convicted and hanged for war crimes.
wiki


Hitler and Msgr. Tiso, intimate, continual throughout the war.





Fact is a Fact....grow up


etc etc etc .... Again .. when you are quoting the same old tired out propaganda and JACK CHICK bunk, then there is no need to read it. Nearly everything you post is the same and it all gets proven wrong. And you never admit it.


I used about 75 links and sources in my write up, only 13 of them have I used before. For everything you say I have posted before I have actually posted about 5 times the amount in this one thread that is new and have also improved the referencing and backing up information of some of my older content as well.

The only thing that I recall that I have posted that has been proven ‘’somewhat’’ to be off the mark was David Kang strongly linking the counterfeiting of the Great Controversy book in China to the Jesuits, in the end I don’t think there is enough evidence to make that link and I did concede that. There may have been something about the history of the LXX and Masoretic Text text history that I stuffed up on but it was mostly off-topic and could not be bothered researching and arguing the point anymore. There is currently a thread in the Origins and Creation forum section that I haven’t replied to yet in about a week about genetic mutations. 3 instances I can recall in some 950 odd posts. Not one of these instances was from you. I have destroyed probably 10 argument lines from you just in the past week (you have not admitted any of these, you just remain silent and go to the next point) in all the time I have had a correspondence with you I have destroyed 20+ arguments of yours, you have never conceded any of these, probably because you are surrounded by a bunch of backslappers who star your moronic posts when your arguments are false, which possibly makes you think you won! Are you interested in truth or plaudits by fools.

This thread has topics in it about the illuminati (which is strongly associated with the NWO), gun control in America and the Vatican Bank.

You were posting on these topics just yesterday (in a separate thread far away)

Gun control

I'd like to see the Vatican BUTT OUT of what other countries do. Unless it has to do with working for the rights of Catholics around the world to worship as they wish .. they should butt out. The Vatican making statements about Americans and gun control or about American border security .. it's none of their freak'n business.
FlyerFan post


Vatican Bank

He never had a chance ....
Poisoned before he could get even a peek at the corrupt Vatican bank.
FlyersFan Post


On linking the Vatican to the NWO (of the illuminati) and Vatican Bank corruption

If the Cardinals are into the New World Order mode, then you’ll see a Salt of the Earth Left Winger elected. The corrupt Cardinals who run the Vatican Bank will make sure that whoever gets in will NOT be someone who will be checking into the finances very closely. Pope John Paul I was elected and those Cardinals quickly poisoned him off. Pope John Paul II learned from that and didn’t go near the banking or the banking Cardinals.
FlyersFan quote


These are all topics in this thread but you don’t post any of your thoughts here huh...don’t wan to admit anything huh

BTW that thread write up of your was very good.

When it comes to arguments of theology differences and prophecy understanding though, let’s just say the outcome for you won’t be so good.

When the Catholic church admits that if people want to follow the bible then they should be Adventists then you know the learned ones are on my side in those areas.

FF, I am going to add you as a rival to my list, my first one. At least your questioning (although mostly ridiculous) opens up the discussion for more truth to come out (and I can at least see you aren’t completely blind, for the first time, after reading that thread of yours). A constructive rivalry hopefully!

P.S the information in this post alone has cut you three ways sideways, will you admit this...NO (or will you prove me wrong for the first time)
edit on 12-2-2013 by JesuitGarlic because: fixed some errors




posted on Feb, 12 2013 @ 08:47 AM
link   
reply to post by JesuitGarlic
 



- Your arguments against Alberto Rivera has crumbled...

The only people who are defending that fraud are, like you, crackpot anti-Catholics. You've yet to demonstrate anything from an unbiased source for any claim that you're making. On the other side, there is absolute proof that Rivera was a lying conman, and that from non-Catholic sources, who have no reason to fabricate evidence.

But, of course, they're most likely Illuminati / Jesuits in disguise / Satan, so who cares about the facts, eh?

There may be some merit in some of your other arguments, but what you don't seem to realize is that, when you openly display your hatred of a group of people, make idiotic claims that are easily disproven, and then claim that anyone who disagrees with you is either stupid or "one of them", you lose all credibility with anyone who doesn't already agree with your kooky claims.

Frankly, if you told me the sun would rise in the east tomorrow, I'd check, just to be sure.



posted on Feb, 12 2013 @ 11:00 AM
link   
reply to post by adjensen
 



The only people who are defending that fraud are, like you, crackpot anti-Catholics.


Seriously Adjensen, have you read any books before from people like Avro Manhattan, William Guy Carr, Edmund Paris, Gary Allen, Charles Chiniquy, David I. Kertzer, Uki Goni?

About the only thing I have heard from Alberto that might have been unique was the claim that it was the Catholic church behind the creation of Mohammed and thus the Islamic religion. I see his other claims, extremely serious claims, being able to be backed up from many many other sources. I see you and FlyersFan picking out these guys, Rivera and Chick, and I just think to myself, damn, you NEED to read more. Those two guys, even if they didn't exist would still leave you with so many questions to answer for you wouldn't know what to do with yourself. I could post thread after thread, page after page of so much content and historical research (as many of them are merely gatherers of historical documents, like Chick is) you would just be inundated with it. But what's the point, neither you or FlyersFan will read my thread as you haven't here.

Seriously, if I really hated the Catholics (they are just misguided in theology like everyone who isn't SDA) I could unleash a mountain of information continually....I am actually being very restrained with what I could post. I could also post on some extremely disgusting topics but choose not to.

It gets me annoyed, when I am being restrained with you, that you don't take what I write seriously.

I have seen this claims of absolute proof against Rivera and I am still yet to see that proof. I really do not care to discuss Rivera in this thread. I might do a post on him in the future still but maybe not (as if I did I would probably have to re-read 20 books from the multiple other sources that back him up to pull up the quotes...and I can't really be bothered to do that for you at this time).


non-Catholic sources, who have no reason to fabricate evidence.

I know all to well who the catholic church places people to get their agenda done. The example of Hort and Wescott is a prime one (outed as serving the Catholic church in their private letters to each other which were published by their sons). The depth the Catholic Church goes to to make something appear from a non-catholic or a protestant source is historically established. Considering their track record, I only need to get a few sniffs of deceit of them before I put up the flag and say this is unreliable. As soon as I saw Christianity Today distributing it I knew something was off (because I already knew of Billy Grahams links and affiliations). So then I look for some rebuttals, the first one that I sent you tears your linked content apart. I then purchase a book from amazon, called something like In Defense of Alberto. That book makes the personal attacks against him almost irrelevant and provides documentation of his identity ext. A little bit more digging, more red flags go off on the true independence of the Christian exposer. To me, you guys bringing up Rivera is really a waste of breath. Unless you can find new sources for exposing them with arguments that haven't been shown baseless, choose a different topic. I am more than willing to see other claims against him but make sure you do some serious research first before you send it.


But, of course, they're most likely Illuminati / Jesuits in disguise / Satan, so who cares about the facts, eh?


I care about the facts, the facts you provided me turned out to be crap.

Let's not forget though what the 2nd President of the United States said:

John Adams (1735-1826; 2nd President of the United States):

Shall we not have regular swarms of them here, in as many disguises as only a king of the gypsies can assume, dressed as painters, publishers, writers, and schoolmasters? If ever there was a body of men who merited eternal damnation on earth and in hell it is this Society of Loyola’s.


And when they are willing to go to the lengths of killing Presidents then disguising themselves or their ties to this protestant is not out of the question (they would perceive it as commendable in fact)

U.S. Army Brigadier General Thomas M. Harris, Rome's Responsibilty for the Assassination of Abraham Lincoln (Pittsburgh, PA: Williams Publishing, 1897): 34:


...the favorite policy of the Jesuits, that of assassination.


Please do follow up on the source...some good reading there

The only reason for me targeting Catholics is that the Bible identifies the Vatican church to be the Beast power, I believe that the false christ is going to present himself very soon and the beast's mark system will come in very soon, and if people want to understand world events then looking at a bit of corresponding Vatican history is a good idea to get a feel for what is going on.

I actually have nothing against Catholics but for me there are only two religions in the world

The Roman Catholic Church and the Seventh-day Adventist Church. They represent the two extremes of Christianity...either Rome is right to claim authority and we should all be Roman Catholics or we should all keep to the authority of the Bible and be SDA's simple. Every other Christian church falls somewhere along the line of the two extremes. And the Christian church because of Jesus is the only true pathway to God (but not the only pathway to heaven) .

For me, there is no point doing threads on Jews or Islam...prophetically they have no more roll to plan in future events. Prophetically everyone either joins the theology of the remnant (which will be historical SDA theology) or join the Beast system (lead by the Vatican and the imposter Christ Satan, helped by America (the Beast of the Earth) and apostate protestant churches (the false prophet - perfectly summed up in the role of those clergy response teams and them being made to teach Pre-Trib propphecy theology).

My posts are meant to have forward looking application...

My typically stance on Catholics is that they are trying to follow God the best way they know how, unfortunately they are propping up a leadership structure that is extremely Satanic and the aims of the structure are very detrimental to the world. If they knew theology and history well they would never be Catholics.
edit on 12-2-2013 by JesuitGarlic because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 12 2013 @ 11:19 AM
link   

I care about the facts, the facts you provided me turned out to be crap.

And which facts are those? Kindly cite facts that I have presented against your beloved Alberto Rivera, which "turned out to be crap."

Posting quotes from anti-Catholics, framed as being unbiased, are not facts -- who cares what John Adams had to say about the Jesuits, since he was a noted anti-Catholic?

As I said, your credibility here is about zero, and you dig that hole a little deeper with every bigoted post you make.



posted on Feb, 12 2013 @ 11:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by JesuitGarlic
I actually have nothing against Catholics but for me there are only two religions in the world

The Roman Catholic Church and the Seventh-day Adventist Church. They represent the two extremes of Christianity...either Rome is right to claim authority and we should all be Roman Catholics or we should all keep to the authority of the Bible and be SDA's simple.

If that's the case, then you're bucking the wrong horse. The SDA church began with a series of failed prophecies by William Miller, phony prophecies and visions by Ellen White, and a theology that teaches salvation by works, a slavish adherence to Judaic Law, contrary to the teachings of Christ.

I don't believe that there is a "true church" any longer, but if there was, it certainly wouldn't be one with a history and theology like yours.



posted on Feb, 12 2013 @ 12:05 PM
link   
reply to post by adjensen
 


Alrighty Adjensen,

I will engage somewhat in these off-topic issues of SDA theology and the Alberto Rivera facts, mostly because no one else is raising anything from the OP, but I don't want the detour to be too long. At the moment though I will be signing off to pick up the discussion tomorrow.

What I would most prefer you do is start a new thread of your own on the Catholic vs SDA issue and I will answer you there and we can get more posters into the mix. Fair?



posted on Feb, 12 2013 @ 01:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by JesuitGarlic
What I would most prefer you do is start a new thread of your own on the Catholic vs SDA issue and I will answer you there and we can get more posters into the mix. Fair?

There is no "Catholic vs SDA" issue to discuss -- your perspective might be that they are the only two churches, but that is certainly not the case. From my perspective, while your church's theology is very obviously misguided, I wouldn't dissuade you from it. Contrary to your belief, most likely, the Catholic Church's official teaching is that a person need not be Roman Catholic to be saved, and I held that belief even when I was a Protestant -- I never believed that my particular denomination had some corner on the truth.

As I said, I do not believe that there is any "true church" on Earth any longer -- if there ever was one, it existed a long time ago, before people started fiddling with faith and introducing things that caused dissension and schism.



posted on Feb, 12 2013 @ 05:28 PM
link   
JesuitGarlic,

Your threads and posts are always entertaining and sourced, which I appreciate. Unfortunately, your sources are often suspect (IMHO). My biggest problems with your threads and posts (and this is my problem, not yours) is that they are HUGE information dumps. That requires any reasoned response to take a tremendous amount of time unless the reader is already familiar with the material or sources.

Neither Reformation.org or Historicist.com are reasonable, objective commentators. Both have a specific anti-Catholic bias (whether or not they come by it honestly) and there are provable factual errors in both. Foxe's Book of Martyrs was an achievement for it's time but to say that it's findings are considered questionable by modern historians would be putting it mildly. Foxe was as much a polemicist as he was a historian.

Of the 7 authors you referenced when asking Adjensen about reading other material, 1 is a academic historian (great), 1 is a respected author but noted anti-Catholic and 1 has a single well received book pertaining to the ratlines. The other four have no serious academic credentials or respect. That's not to dismiss their work (I actually quite enjoyed None Dare Call it Conspiracy), but it's certainly not a given that these people have anything serious to offer. Especially Chiniquy, who was a joke.

Regarding Alberto Rivera, this was from my response regarding him in another thread. Perhaps you'd like to comment?

"Alberto River made some extraordinary claims. As we know, extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. To the best of my knowledge, Mr. River offered no proof of his claims at all, let alone extraordinary proof.

If you can substantiate some of his claims, it would be appreciated. Let's start out at the beginning of his claimed work. He supposedly infiltrated hundreds of God fearing Church's and acted as an agent provocateur while also obtaining 8 graduate degrees, all but one being doctorates (it may have been 7, I'm going from memory here). This was, I believe, before the age of 25 or so. Can you explain this chronology?

He also claimed to have gathered much of his information from reading secret texts in the Vatican archives from the Middle Ages. Mr. Rivera wasn't able to read or write Latin. Can you explain this?

Mr. Rivera claimed to rescue his sister from a convent in London. There's no record of his sister ever being there or being a nun. Can you explain this?

Mr. Rivera claimed that the Vatican tried to have him killed by: poison, arson, shoving him in front of a moving train, shooting him multiple times, feeding him ground glass and having his Jesuit dentist infect one of his teeth in the hopes that the infection would grow to the brain and kill him. Do you think that these stories are credible?

As you are concerned that any naysayers are Catholic stooges, do you believe that Rand Winburn and Donald Blanton are pro-Catholic? "

Have a good night,


Eric



posted on Feb, 12 2013 @ 05:42 PM
link   
reply to post by JesuitGarlic
 


You clearly like to write.

Can you summarise (in your own words) what you have tried to say in numerous external sources and quotes. In your own words in perhaps just a couple of concise paragraphs.

Your posts look flash, but they are actually read incoherently because you are going backwards and forwards with your sources.

Regards



posted on Feb, 13 2013 @ 10:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by paraphi
reply to post by JesuitGarlic
 


Can you summarise (in your own words) what you have tried to say in numerous external sources and quotes. In your own words in perhaps just a couple of concise paragraphs.


The basic gist of the thread is to raise awareness in people from America and other countries about how history gets played out. People can't seem to understand why this event happened or that. This thread is meant to go to the root. Why do we have these big wars, why do we have the US government pushing for all these restrictions on liberty, why do they stage false flag attacks, why is there a coordinated implosion of the world economy, why do we continue down the same path no matter what government gets put in?

If you study the material in the thread I make the case that it is the Vatican who are chiefly behind these things, often using the secret societies the Jesuits created as proxies for much of their action. The Jesuits were chiefly formed to destroy Protestantism, along the way it seems that this monster has extended its aims to restoring total world control back to the Papacy but has also gained the element of becoming particularly Satanic in character. What the world is currently experiencing is the final elements of the Luciferian plan devised by 33 degree Freemason Albert Pike with the head of the Illuminati at the time, Giuseppe Mazzini. We also see a consistent push for legislation in America perfectly in line with the tenets that govern he Catholic Inquisition of heretics (those who wanted to think for themselves).

Taking this information into account, the best thing someone can do is to focus special attention on their relationship with God because things are about to get very rough in the world and people are going to need a lot of faith to get through it with their souls intact. Listen to people who know this information and speak on it, run from those who try and cover it up...Don't follow what the Vatican has to say when the false Christ comes

And for those who want to be super effective against tyranny and help the most people in a lasting way during the times we are about to enter, they should read The Great Controversy

Those you want to read something that will help build up their faith and relationship with God should read The Desire of Ages.

That is the summary of the OP, the purpose and the best advice I can give to someone based on the content of the post
edit on 13-2-2013 by JesuitGarlic because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 14 2013 @ 08:50 AM
link   
I will hopefully get to your posts Adjensen and EricD in the next few days, just taking a bit of a break at the moment to read a couple of books that have my interest.

This 4 min video has re-caught my attention today and I felt the need to post it as it is related to the OP.

Satanism confirmed in the Vatican


The video is from a man I respect a great deal, Malachi Martin, a renowned Catholic exorcist who was also an expert in ancient languages and spent time in high positions inside the Vatican and close to the Pope a few decades back.
edit on 14-2-2013 by JesuitGarlic because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 14 2013 @ 10:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by JesuitGarlic
The video is from a man I respect a great deal, Malachi Martin, a renowned Catholic exorcist who was also an expert in ancient languages and spent time in high positions inside the Vatican and close to the Pope a few decades back.

I don't watch videos, but from reading the biography of that guy... no. Once again, you've found a biased source of ridiculous claims.

I know that you're young, but surely you understand the rules of evidence, don't you? An ex-Jesuit who broke with the church because he didn't think that Vatican II reformed the church enough, and then wrote a sensationalized book to make money is not a credible source, not by any stretch of the imagination.

Here's a response to Malachi Martin: Bursting the Malachi Martin Bubble. Judging from the site, article and comments on it, the debunkers are just as crazy as you are for believing him.

And, frankly, if Martin actually said this on Art Bell's radio show, he's an idiot:


Caller: My question is, I wanted to know if you were familiar with the, a, story that came by--at least to me--by Hal Lindsey--the evangelical author and prophetical scholar?

M.M.: Yes, I like Hal very much. I think he's God-like.

Caller: He's on the ball.

M.M.: He's on the ball...I do esteem Hal Lindsey very much. (Source)

Hal Lindsey is a moron who's made a career of failed prophecies that no one ever seems to call him on.



posted on Feb, 14 2013 @ 01:34 PM
link   
reply to post by adjensen
 


I will just respond to your MM article quickly at this stage by giving you something to ponder adjensen.

Considering that you are using Henry Makow as a source to support your argument I will post some other interesting things by him as well.

Do you realize that he also has this article about Illuminati defector Svali, this same woman I have mentioned previously to you as she describes a ritual sacrifice of a kidnapped and drugged baby inside the Vatican at her sealing ceremony.

Or how about these quotes from his book that I have happened to have read already

On New Years Day, 2004 former Pope John Paul II called for a "new world order... based on the goals of the United Nations." When a world leader uses this terminology, it can only mean one thing. He is a part of the Luciferian conspiracy to create a totalitarian world government. According to Piers Compton, a former Catholic priest, the Papacy was actually subverted by the Illuminati in 1958 when John XXIII became Pope. This was the culmination of a 200-year campaign to infiltrate and destroy the Catholic Church.

Makow, Henry (2010-06-01). Illuminati 2 - Deceit and Seduction (p. 40). Silas Green. Kindle Edition.



Ironically, when Leo XIII died in 1903, a Freemason, Cardinal Mariano Rampolla, was almost elected Pope. Emperor Franz Joseph of Austria vetoed his appointment in the last moment. . The Illuminists had to wait another 55 years to gain control of the Papacy. When Pope Pius XII died in 1958, a Freemason Cardinal Angello Roncalli, became Pope John XXIII. Predictably, his first act was to begin to remove the element of Divine Revelation from Catholic teaching, and to embrace naturalism, materialism and Communism. These steps were taken at the Ecumenical Council in 1962 and Vatican Two in 1965.

Makow, Henry (2010-06-01). Illuminati 2 - Deceit and Seduction (p. 41). Silas Green. Kindle Edition.



Cardinal Giovanni Montini, who succeeded John XXIII as Pope Paul VI in 1963, was also a Freemason and socialist. (In 1944 Pope Pius XII had dismissed him as Vatican Secretary of State for conducting secret negotiations with the Communists.

Makow, Henry (2010-06-01). Illuminati 2 - Deceit and Seduction (p. 41). Silas Green. Kindle Edition.



Paul VI also embraced a sinister symbol used by Satanists in the Sixth Century, which had been revived by Vatican Two. This was a bent or broken cross on which was displayed a repulsive and distorted figure of Christ. Black magicians and sorcerers in the Middle Ages had used it for occult purposes. It represented the "Mark of the Beast." Compton: "Yet not only Paul VI but also his successors the two John Pauls carried that object and held it up to be revered by crowds who had not the slightest idea that it stood for the anti Christ." (72)

Makow, Henry (2010-06-01). Illuminati 2 - Deceit and Seduction (p. 42). Silas Green. Kindle Edition.



In 1976, the journal Borghese printed a list of 125 top clerics who were Freemasons in contravention of Church law. It included their dates of initiation and secret code names taken from the Italian Register of Secret Societies. Compton prints the list, which includes the heads of Vatican radio and press, Catholic education as well as numerous high officials, Cardinals and Archbishops. Because Paul VI was Pope, nothing came of it. Sounding very much like the Mason he was, Paul said in 1969: "We are about to witness a greater freedom in the life of the Church...fewer obligations and fewer inward prohibitions. Formal disciplines will be reduced...every form of intolerance will be abolished." (104) This attitude is explained by reports that from 1936-1950, the future Paul VI was part of a Communist espionage network, a part owner in a chain of brothels and financed erotic films. (110)

Makow, Henry (2010-06-01). Illuminati 2 - Deceit and Seduction (p. 42). Silas Green. Kindle Edition.



On Nov. 27, 1983 Pope John Paul II issued a Papal Bull that legalized secret society membership for Roman Catholics. While ostensibly a celibate priest, Compton suggests that Woytyla's behavior resembled a Bohemian artist. He was involved in theatre in Poland and penned a play about prostitution. Compton reproduces pictures of him when he was a Bishop or Cardinal. He is with a woman and child on a beach. The child is climbing on him. They look very much like a family.

Makow, Henry (2010-06-01). Illuminati 2 - Deceit and Seduction (p. 43). Silas Green. Kindle Edition.


Hmmm, this makes a bit of a problem for you adjensen. Am I to believe that you support this man's opinion about Martin yet don't support his other work that is even more damning on the Catholic church. The short chapter of his book includes two short sections of some quotes from Malachi Martin, he seems to think he is still a credible source to quote and the publication of the book is a month after the publication of the article you sent me. Did he change his opinion on MM? Perhaps, needless to say though, using Henry Makow as your source gives you way more headaches than it gives me!

And how about this quote exposing Obama, just when your gun-control debate is siding with Obama


The Illuminati are Satanists. They engage in Satanic ritual (human) sacrifice and every form of sexual perversion. Blair and Obama belong to the Illuminati. Their aim is to destroy religion by throwing them all into a blender. A phony world "religion" will emerge led by the Antichrist and dedicated to Lucifer. Blair's talk of being an "instrument of God's love" is classic Orwellian doublespeak: the words are the same but the intent is exactly the opposite. Similarly, Satan's agents, Illuminati Christian impersonators, have replaced real Christians at the head of "Christian" societies. Their role is to discredit God, Jesus, Christianity and true religion.

Makow, Henry (2010-06-01). Illuminati 2 - Deceit and Seduction (p. 45). Silas Green. Kindle Edition.


I don't think you quiet seem to realise how much I read adjensen. Better luck next time.

Have you on the other-hand listened to any lengthy radio interviews with Malachi Martin before or read any of his books?
edit on 14-2-2013 by JesuitGarlic because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 14 2013 @ 01:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by JesuitGarlic
Considering that you are using Henry Makow as a source to support your argument I will post some other interesting things by him as well.

I don't think that you read what I wrote -- I cited him as being yet another crackpot who has no credibility, even when debunking other crackpots.

Whether it's you, Henry Makow, Malachi Martin or anyone else along the same lines, you're all the same. Non-critical thinkers, who dismiss facts in favour of ridiculous conspiracy theories that fulfill what you want to believe, no matter how far fetched they happen to be.



posted on Feb, 14 2013 @ 04:59 PM
link   
reply to post by JesuitGarlic
 


I've read most of Malachi Martin's books. I believe the only exceptions are some pamphlets or novellas that he had written that are now out of print. He was a brilliant man and I loved his writing. King of Kings was a great novelization of David and Hostage to the Devil was terrifying.

Although it appears as though Martin believes what he described in Windswept House to be factual (fitting with his style of 'faction' writing), he doesn't offer supporting evidence in the book or in interviews (that I'm aware of, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong).

He's also been shown to take certain 'liberties' with the truth in the past, including the reason for his leaving Rome and his relationship with the Church.

It should also be noted that Martin, whom you seem to read and admire, was a Catholic until his death.

Eric



posted on Feb, 15 2013 @ 10:36 AM
link   
reply to post by adjensen
 


So you want to post a link supposedly throwing mud at Malachi Martin yet say that the source is unreliable nut. So why would you bother posting a link to me you thought was from an unreliable source, you are just wasting my time....you feel like you have to respond to everything I post when it is very clear that you are extremely poorly read on basically all aspects in the fields of religious conspiracy. As I have stated earlier, all you seem to do is google search the first character assassination article that suits your agenda (of protecting the image of the Catholic Church) and trundle off. You don't seem like you have spent any serious time researching any aspects of the conspiratorial history of the world, and yet here you are on what I am guessing is the biggest conspiracy forum in the world.


Non-critical thinkers, who dismiss facts in favour of ridiculous conspiracy theories that fulfill what you want to believe, no matter how far fetched they happen to be.


Not that I believe everything Makow says (he frankly doesn't win me over with his writing style), but if you think that none of the cardinals or bishops in Rome are Freemasons aswell, you're delusional!

Let’s have a look at an example of a non-critical thinker

you don't want them banning something that you have no need of, because you think it the beginning of a slippery slope. But the past has shown us that this is largely an unfounded concern. In 1985, the United States passed the Law Enforcement Officers Protection Act, which banned "cop killer" ammunition that could penetrate bulletproof armour. I don't remember a number of other bans which followed on from that
adjensen quote from gun control debate


The past has showed us that they next went for all handguns nationwide after the Waco Texas massacre shown to be deliberately brought upon by government agents (i.e another false flag attack...this time murdering a hell of a lot of former Adventists...see OP under Bill Clinton for more details)

Then they passed Federal Assault Weapons Ban 1994


No correlation between gun ownership and murder has been found, and data does not show that an assault weapons ban would magically stop — or even decrease — mass shootings. In fact, when the assault weapons ban was previously in place from 1994 to 2004, mass shootings actually showed a slight increase.
Gun Control Law Will Not prevent Crime – Infowars Article


Gun control myths and realities - Cato Institute

Statistics show that as guns per capita increase, serious violent crime has decreased



look beyond paranoia or even legitimate concern and question whether that threat is real, or merely assumed. Not for a moment do I arbitrarily dismiss the concerns of Second Amendment proponents, in legitimate defense of that tenet."
adjensen quote from gun control debate


Is there a legitimate concern?

A newly leaked US Army Military Police training manual for “Civil Disturbance Operations” outlines how military assets are to be used domestically to quell riots, confiscate firearms and even kill Americans on U.S. soil during mass civil unrest.

The document (PDF), which is dated 2006 and was used for a self-learning course at the U.S. Army Military Police School at Fort McClellan, makes it clear that the operations described in the manual apply to both “CONUS and OCONUS,” meaning inside the Continental United States and outside the Continental United States.
...
The manual also describes how prisoners will be processed through temporary internment camps under the guidance of U.S. Army FM 3-19.40 Internment/Resettlement Operations, which as we reported earlier this year, outlines how internees would be “re-educated” into developing an “appreciation of U.S. policies” while detained in prison camps inside the United States.
On page 20 of the manual, rules regarding the use of “deadly force” in confronting “dissidents” are made disturbingly clear with the directive that a, “Warning shot will not be fired.”
...
This 115 page manual represents a shocking new insight into how the U.S. military will be used domestically to violently quell unrest in the aftermath of a total economic collapse or other national emergency.
Army Manual Reveals Plans to Kill Rioters and Demonstrators in America


Is there a legitimate concern of Government tyranny against patriots when the Govt as just in the last year purchase enough ammunition to be used domestically (inside the US) to wage full-scale war for 30 years or that the characterise those interested in Liberty to be terrorists?

An approximation of how many rounds of ammunition the DHS has now secured over the last 10 months stands at around 1.625 billion. In March 2012, ATK announced that they had agreed to provide the DHS with a maximum of 450 million bullets over four years, a story that prompted questions about why the feds were buying ammunition in such large quantities. In September last year, the federal agency purchased a further 200 million bullets.

To put that in perspective, during the height of active battle operations in Iraq, US soldiers used 5.5 million rounds of ammunition a month. Extrapolating the figures, the DHS has purchased enough bullets over the last 10 months to wage a full scale war for almost 30 years
...
A Study funded by the Department of Homeland Security that was leaked last year characterizes Americans who are “suspicious of centralized federal authority,” and “reverent of individual liberty” as “extreme right-wing” terrorists.
...
While Americans are being browbeaten with rhetoric about the necessity to give up semi-automatic firearms in the name of preventing school shootings, the federal government is arming itself to the teeth with both ammunition and guns. Last September, the DHS purchased no less than 7,000 fulling automatic assault rifles [which are only good for mowing down waves of people] , labeling them “Personal Defense Weapons.”
Infowars Article Feb 7th 2013


Are the Feds Preparing for Civil War


"But," adjensen adds, tapping his finger on the headline, "I can't imagine Joe Biden or President Obama rumbling their fingers together, gleeful at the prospects of disarming American patriots, simply for the benefit of the tyrranization of America.
adjensen gun control debate


Gleeful at the prospect of disarming American patriots, let’s see


You just gotta love the audacity of the U.S. federal government and its active staging of crimes in order to achieve political goals. Operation Fast and Furious is the most recent example of a U.S.-run criminal conspiracy pursued for the ultimate purpose of dismantling the Bill of Rights. It involved ATF agents running a criminal scheme that sold literally tens of thousands of guns to Mexican drug gangs, after which the government planned to call for "gun sales restrictions" following the wave of gun violence that would inevitably result.

There was only one problem with the government's evil plan, however -- some ATF agents blew the whistle, and then the whole conspiracy exploded in their faces. Now even the mainstream media -- which usually won't touch government conspiracies -- is all over Operation Fast and Furious.
Secret recordings emerge over Operation Fast and Furious and the ATF's conspiracy to put more guns into the hands of Mexican drug gangs



Despite the Obama administration’s best efforts to characterize Operation Fast and Furious, a recently revealed ATF program that sought to put U.S.-based firearms into the hands of Mexican drug smugglers, as little more than a ‘screw up’, the most damning evidence strongly indicates that the whole operation was in fact an attempt to launch a false flag assault on the second amendment rights of the American people.

Under Operation Fast and Furious, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives “Sanctioned the purchase of weapons in U.S. gun shops and tracked the smuggling route to the Mexican border. Reportedly, more than 2,500 firearms were sold to straw buyers who then handed off the weapons to gunrunners under the nose of ATF.” Some of the weapons were later used to kill US Border Patrol agents like Brian Terry.

An editorial posted at Investors.com this week asks, Was Fast and Furious a gun control plot?, a reasonable assumption to make given the fact that Obama has openly revealed his administration’s plans to sabotage the second amendment by stealth
...
the notion that the Obama administration would deliberately implement a program they knew could later be used to demonize gun rights is hardly conspiratorial given the fact that Obama himself told gun control advocate Sarah Brady earlier this year that his administration was working “under the radar” to sneak attack the second amendment.
During a March 30 meeting between Jim and Sarah Brady and White House Press Secretary Jay Carney, at which Obama “dropped in,” the president reportedly told Brady, “I just want you to know that we are working on it (gun control)….We have to go through a few processes, but under the radar.”

The quote appeared in an Apr il 11 Washington Post story [page 2] about Obama’s gun control czar Steve Croley.
Obama Administration Caught Running False Flag Against Second Amendment



The level of outright criminality in the Obama administration is now apparent to almost everyone [except for adjensen it seems]. In the face of incriminating documents being released regarding the lawbreaking Fast and Furious operation pulled off by Attorney General Eric Holder, President Obama has invoked executive order to prevent their release.
...
Eric Holder and the Obama administration are involved in a deep conspiracy that resulted in the murder of U.S. law enforcement agents. The point of the operation, however, was to cause a spike in gun violence in America which could then be invoked as justification to crush the Second Amendment and outlaw firearms ownership across the country. It is, without question, the most evil government false flag operations we've seen since 9/11.
Obama's Nixon moment: Executive Order invoked to block release of incriminating Fast and Furious documents

Gleeful? Sounds very gleeful to me, they planned murder to blame it on the 2nd amendment for an operation they created!

Let’s have a look at a post by ATSer, Seabag:

NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre proclaimed today that Obama will claim not to have pursued an anti-gun agenda during his first term, but Obama is really conspiring to destroy the second amendment of the constitution during his second term.

Speaking to CPAC today he said, "All that first term, lip service to gun owners is just part of a massive Obama conspiracy to deceive voters and hide his true intentions to destroy the Second Amendment during his second term."


The Obama campaign’s strategy goes like this:

1.Neutralize gun owners and NRA members as a political force in the upcoming national election by pretending to be pro-gun or at least not focused on pushing a gun-control agenda;

2.With gun owners neutralized, Obama will be able to win the election. After the president is re-elected, he won’t have to answer to voters because he won’t have to face another re-election battle;

3.Launch a full-scale, all-out assault to rip the Second Amendment out of the Bill of Rights through legislation, litigation, regulation, executive orders and international treaties — in short, every lever of power at the administration’s disposal.
Daily Caller

Seabag posted 11-2-2012

Seabag posts again, Obama's anti-gun record documented
Fast and Furious scandal blown wide open by Univision


President Obama faced twenty parents last month, who had lost their first grade children at the hand of a madman armed with a weapon that had capabilities that you and I both agree are excessive and unnecessary." adjensen gun control debate



Original reports were that 3 guns were found at the scene of the Sandy Hook elementary school mass shotting in Newtown, Connecticut.

2 HANDGUNS & 1 ASSAULT RIFLE

Latest reports are that 4 handguns were found inside the school.

Video shows authorities retrieving the assault rifle from the trunk of Lanza’s car outside the school.

But at a press conference today the Medical Examiner said, “All the wounds I know of at this point were cause by the long weapon.” A reporter then clairifed, “So the rifle was the primary weapon?” The Medical Examiner replying, “Yes.”

So the assault rifle found outside the school in the trunk of Lanza’s car was used to kill every single person?

And the 4 handguns found inside the school weren’t used at all?
NBC Reports AR15 Not Used in Sandy Hook Massacre, Only Handguns


Sandy Hook AR15 hoax? Still no surveillance footage released

So are handguns the things you want to ban now, because their aint no AR15 (‘’capabilities excessive and unnecessary’’) used in the Sandy Hook shooting? Stop swallowing the cool-aid, and start thinking critically a bit more please, it is tiresome to deal with a person with such habitual naïveté thinking they have an opinion based on any sense of reality.


while I think that there are alternative solutions, all of them are less effective than the obvious preventative solution -- getting rid of weapons that no reasonable person truly needs
adjensen gun control debate

Let’s analysis Adjensen’s critical thinking skills proposing his obvious solution.


We've also heard the reason the United States has a "gun crime problem" is because we allow citizens to own handguns however, the numbers on violent crime committed using a gun tell a different story.
New data out from the UK, where guns are banned, shows gun crime has soared by 35 percent.
Townhall.com



A 1997 Justice Department report on murders in the U.S. shows that our country has a murder rate of seven victims per 100,000 population per year. There are a number of well-known examples of countries with more liberal gun laws and lower murder rates than the U.S. One is Finland, with a murder rate of 2.9. Israel is another example; although its population is heavily armed, Israel's murder rate is only 1.4. In Switzerland, gun ownership is a way of life. Its murder rate is 2.7.

By contrast, consider Brazil. All firearms in Brazil must be registered with the government. This registration process can take anywhere from 30 days to three months. All civilian handguns are limited in caliber to no more than 9mm. All rifles must fire handgun ammunition only. Brazilians may only buy one gun per year. At any one time, they may only have in their possession a maximum of six guns: two handguns, two rifles and two shotguns. To transport their guns, citizens must obtain a special police permit. CCW permits are available but are rarely issued.

Therefore, it should not be a revelation to anyone that Brazil has a thriving black market in guns. Virtually any type of gun is available, for a price. Incidentally, Brazil's murder rate is 19 victims per 100,000 population per year.

In Cuba, Fidel Castro controls every aspect of life with an iron hand, including gun ownership. Castro remembers well how he and his rag-tag armed Communist rebels overthrew the government of Fulgencio Batista and set up a Communist dictatorship. An armed populace is threatening to a repressive government. Still, somebody in Cuba is obtaining guns and using them to murder fellow citizens. Cuba's murder rate is 7.8.
...
Mexico's murder rate is an eye-popping 17.5. Mexican authorities are fond of blaming the high murder rate on firearms smuggled across the border from the United States. Nonsense. The U.S. has many more personal guns than Mexico, yet our murder rate is far lower than Mexico's. It is Mexico's absurd gun laws that prevent law-abiding citizens from protecting themselves against illegally armed criminals.

Guns are effectively outlawed in Russia. Private handgun ownership is totally prohibited. A permit is required to purchase a long gun. All guns are registered with authorities. When transporting a long gun, it must be disassembled. Long guns may only be used for self-defense when the gun owner is on his own property. By the way, Russia's murder rate is a staggering 30.6.
The Numbers Speak For Themselves (gun control and murder rates of assorted countries)

Hmmm, so the countries with the people who can readily get and walk around with assault weapons, like Israel and Switzerland have the lowest murder rates in the world and the ones with the most restrictions on legal access to guns have the most murders...and your advocating for more bans, that’s not demonstrating critically thinking adjensen, that is demonstrating you follow the blind ignorance or the mainstream agenda because it feels good to you.

Statistics prove more guns equals less crime
---------
You have demonstrated that you readily get into debates on topics you have no prior background of knowledge in.

I'd like to thank Skyfloating for suggesting a topic I knew nothing about, and the ATS Debate Forum for hosting
quote from Adjensen's Crop Circles debate


And thus make ridiculous concluding statements like:

it was mowed, not flattened, and by the devil, not by a UFO. In other words, not the same thing.

100 personal testimonies confirm alien abduction experiences can be stopped by calling on the name of Jesus

Conclusions from the website is that ETs (aliens) are just a demonic entity playing a hoax on the population so when a person calls on the name of Jesus for help during an abduction experience, the experience is stopped part way through and the entity fades back into another dimension.

Same conclusion made in Gary Bates book, Alien Intrusion and by others as well.

Your giving me a stab about critically thinking, when I have easily demonstrated that when you talk on topics that can be easily researched, your conclusions are exactly opposite of what they should be. I don’t need comments from you about other topics you have never researched properly or at all, telling how things are. Your opinion is a demonstrated JOKE

I am grate that EricD does sensible posts and has actually read some books to develop an opinion about things, unlike yourself (and FF)
edit on 15-2-2013 by JesuitGarlic because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 15 2013 @ 11:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by JesuitGarlic
So you want to post a link supposedly throwing mud at Malachi Martin yet say that the source is unreliable nut. So why would you bother posting a link to me you thought was from an unreliable source

Well, mostly as a demonstration of the fact that you and your arguments are mired in a community of crackpots. I've yet to see you cite a source that isn't suspect, and this whole "Jesuits are Illuminati who rule the world" thing is just plain idiotic.


Let’s have a look at an example of a non-critical thinker

you don't want them banning something that you have no need of, because you think it the beginning of a slippery slope. But the past has shown us that this is largely an unfounded concern. In 1985, the United States passed the Law Enforcement Officers Protection Act, which banned "cop killer" ammunition that could penetrate bulletproof armour. I don't remember a number of other bans which followed on from that
adjensen quote from gun control debate


The past has showed us that they next went for all handguns nationwide after the Waco Texas massacre shown to be deliberately brought upon by government agents (i.e another false flag attack...this time murdering a hell of a lot of former Adventists...see OP under Bill Clinton for more details)

Then they passed Federal Assault Weapons Ban 1994

Seriously, you want to argue that banning "cop killer" bullets in 1985 directly led to the ban on assault weapons nine years later, and even if true, that constitutes "a number of other bans", as I am quoted as saying?


And thus make ridiculous concluding statements like:

it was mowed, not flattened, and by the devil, not by a UFO. In other words, not the same thing.

What is wrong with you? In that post, which you've intentionally taken out of context, I referred to a folktale, which claimed that a circle in the grass had been created as the result of the devil mowing it -- I didn't say that I thought that the devil had done anything.

Thanks for the clear demonstration of your inability to read and/or comprehend plainly written statements and logical inferences, not to mention your obvious intellectual dishonesty in misrepresenting the words of others.
edit on 15-2-2013 by adjensen because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 15 2013 @ 12:49 PM
link   
reply to post by adjensen
 



Well, mostly as a demonstration of the fact that you and your arguments are mired in a community of crackpots.

You're the the one that quotes from there and then you try and turn it around and that it is my argument. Shameless

I have just shown you numerous quotes from credible sources showing that your country is in serious trouble due to your politicians and media coordinating attacks on the 2nd amendment and you have nothing to say about it. I would be ashamed if I actually lived in America and had to rely on people like you to preserve liberty.


Seriously, you want to argue that banning "cop killer" bullets in 1985 directly led to the ban on assault weapons nine years later

I am arguing that America has steadily tried to bring stronger restrictions on guns on a consistent basis (some have passed others didn't) over a couple of decades. You don't seem to care about any kind of concerning trend in America, just the fact whether I can prove a direct link or not. Listen, get over your ego....America is in big trouble. They don't need people like you arguing trivialities when you are forgetting the 300lb gorilla in the room.


In that post, which you've intentionally taken out of context, I referred to a folktale, which claimed that a circle in the grass had been created as the result of the devil mowing it -- I didn't say that I thought that the devil had done anything.

I didn't take anything out of context. You said a UFO and the devil is not the same thing. I provided proof and sources that say they are the same thing...simple. Don't try and confuse things to save face.

All the copious sources I cited (during the body of the post) was for you to research in your own time so you can develop a real opinion about a critical issue in America, not something you should just gloss over and forget, America and God deserves better from you.

I could care less about whether you think my sources are credible or not (I have a clear conscience with what I post and research very hard). Your only here to pollute the dissemination of information from this thread concerning important issue of liberty with your crap. You can go find out how wrong you are when the false christ comes and confirms all that I have been saying. Until then, good riddance.
edit on 15-2-2013 by JesuitGarlic because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 15 2013 @ 01:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by JesuitGarlic
reply to post by adjensen
 



Well, mostly as a demonstration of the fact that you and your arguments are mired in a community of crackpots.

You're the the one that quotes from there and then you try and turn it around and that it is my argument.

I didn't turn anything around -- go look at my post, I said right then and there that they were as crazy as you are.


I have just shown you numerous quotes from credible sources showing that your country is in serious trouble due to your politicians and media coordinating attacks on the 2nd amendment and you have nothing to say about it.

Why would I have anything to say about it? You're not from the United States, so why would you care about it, and, more importantly, why would I care what someone, who is clearly delusional, thinks about it?

As I said previously, your credibility is pretty much zero. Your opinion of politics in the United States is of no interest.


You said a UFO and the devil is not the same thing. I provided proof and sources that say they are the same thing...simple.

The devil is an alien, and you think you have proof?

Okay, you've gone round the bend on that one. Even your Seventh Day Adventist buddies would say that you're a certifiable nut after that. Unless you're just posting that as a joke, I'd seriously suggest that you seek counseling, as your grip on reality is tenuous, at best.



posted on Feb, 15 2013 @ 03:03 PM
link   
reply to post by adjensen
 



The devil is an alien, and you think you have proof? Okay, you've gone round the bend on that one.

No, the fallen angels under Satan's command often now impersonate being an alien to perpetuate a false theology to the world that promotes evolutionary origins and that Jesus is not our Creator.

This information is confirmed by 400 testimonies to the fact when a hoax alien abduction experience was being done to them and they stopped it half way through by calling on the name of Jesus. This is the conclusion of a division tasked to study the phenomenon in the CIA for several decades as well. The findings of the division were written brought to the public attention in this book by Nick Redfern (which I have also read).

The group in the intelligence community are also going to be interviewed and used as a source in Tom Horn and Chris Putnam's newest book Exo-Vaticana: Petrus Romanus, Project LUCIFER, and the Vatican's astonishing exo-theological plan for the arrival of an alien savior. These guy correctly predicted the resignation of the Pope a good year before it happened and reiterated there claim again 3 weeks before it happened.

Dealing with your moronic comments when you are so dense and ignorant of the world is so tiresome

What you call crazy thinking is actually official policy inside American intelligence agencies....
edit on 15-2-2013 by JesuitGarlic because: (no reason given)





top topics
 
14
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join