A catholic conspiracy theorist: my thoughts on Osama Bin Laden

On Faustina's "Day of Mercy" no less.


That was going to be the original title of this thread. But then I realized that, for ATS, it was too religious, and too obscure to hold any currency. On top of that the likelihood of having the opening post attacked purely for being from a religious person and not for any particular subject raised, had a high order of probability.

So I wrote this disclaimer first.

I'm not writing this because I think I'm right, or to convince anyone. No official in the church has advised me in any way. I only thought to share the perspective of a lifelong Catholic, a military veteran who has seen action, and one who joined the ranks of conspiracy theorist back in the 70's. My Mom was strongly against the Vietnam conflict, and made sure we all knew that it was the poor who were the biggest victims.

/end disclaimer

The actual post is below.

On Faustina's "Day of Mercy" no less.


So the news breaks that Osama Bin Laden has been killed. As I watch the live video from the Whitehouse I get this sick sensation that I have just witnessed a human sacrifice on TV, in the temple of of the American Mind. Maybe even the world TV mind.

But as I look into it the evidence doesn't bear this out. At least not according to the story told.

Apparently the strike team gave Osama the opportunity to surrender, and he chose to go down shooting. So mercy was offered, or at least the option. Osama seems to have chosen the Islamic path to paradise of death in Jihad against the infidels. And in that sense I'm reminded of something else.

I'm reminded of the demon in the Hindu Epic the Ramayana who, in the end, was happy to be killed by Lord Rama. So I dig around in the "reactions" section of Aljazeera and sure enough, the Home Minister of India has this to say.

We takenote with grave concern that part of the statement in which President Obama said that the firefight in which Osama bin Laden was killed took place in Abbottabad "deep inside Pakistan".

This fact underlines our concern that terrorists belonging to different organisations find sanctuary in Pakistan.

- P Chidambaram - Indian home minister
aljazeera/reactions

But then I noticed something else about the Aljazeera reactions page. There is no comment from the Vatican State. I have suspected for about a decade now that the next nuke to go off in the world would be aimed at the Vatican. The reasons for this are many. The irreligious nature of the public face of the NWO, the huge campaign world wide to make it ok to hate the clergy, and the opportunism of someone trying to play both sides against each other in this case east vs west.

So I look around for the Vatican reaction and here it is.

Al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden will have to answer to God for having killed many people and exploiting religion to spread hate, the Vatican said on Monday.

- Reuters

Now for the "omg this guy is a religious nut" part of the post.

The last confirmed vision of Jesus, that I'm aware of, were the visitations of Sister Helena Kowalska a polish nun prior to WWI. In her diaries she recorded that Jesus wanted us to bring him the prisoners; instead we have built more prisons, and to make the first sunday after easter the "Day of Mercy." Instead we seem to have made it into a day of death for great enemies.

I can't help but feel that the vatican is going to take the heat for this.

Apparently I'm not the only one.


David Grouchy

Originally posted by davidgrouchy
I have suspected for about a decade now that the next nuke to go off in the world would be aimed at the Vatican. The reasons for this are many. The irreligious nature of the public face of the NWO, the huge campaign world wide to make it ok to hate the clergy, and the opportunism of someone trying to play both sides against each other in this case east vs west.

You would be absolutely right. It will be a direct hit to the CIA and its Intel stored there. Just as the Intel at the WTC and Building 7 was evaporated in minutes. A convenience to all parties involved and of special interests in the UN.

BTW, the link you gave was priceless. Very hypocritical.

"Osama bin Laden, as everyone knows, had the grave responsibility of having spread division and hate among people, causing the deaths of an innumerable number of people and exploiting religion for these purposes," -- Statement from the Vatican

S&F. I also don't know how to feel about this either, religiously, and "rationally". I'm kinda somber by the whole thing and a little confused, mixed with worry for what this really means and what will happen next. But I very much agree with you when it comes to the disfranchisement and possible destruction of our church. Hove you heard of Quaddfi declaring or wanting to declare ware on Italy? Distressing

I starred and Flagged you for this BTW, it's a great thread, but I have one problem with it.

As a conspiracy theorist back from the 70's you should have noted one thing. The blatant reaction and subsequent retraction from the DoD. It's classic and stands out strongly. I always trust the boots on the ground and their first words. It's usually accurate.

Originally posted by davidgrouchy

But as I look into it the evidence doesn't bear this out. At least not according to the story told.

Apparently the strike team gave Osama the opportunity to surrender, and he chose to go down shooting. So mercy was offered, or at least the option. Osama seems to have chosen the Islamic path to paradise of death in Jihad against the infidels.

(Reuters) - The U.S. special forces team that hunted down Osama bin Laden was under orders to kill the al Qaeda mastermind, not capture him, a U.S. national security official told Reuters. "This was a kill operation," the official said, making clear there was no desire to try to capture bin Laden alive in Pakistan.

Source for Above

Then, the quick "oooops we shouldnt have said that"

Official: Bin Laden Mission Was Kill Or Capture, Not Just Kill Read more: swampland.time.com...

Reuters’ Mark Hosenball is reporting that the U.S. special forces that raided Osama bin Laden’s compound Sunday were under orders to kill the terrorist leader, not capture him. But an administration official tells TIME that the report is not accurate.

Source for Above

reply to post by davidgrouchy
I'm confused on the whole issue of when where and have been trying to look at this news with a rational viewpoint,as it is hard to cut through the lies and theory's.I think your thread is the first to approach this subject with a sense of logic. thanks for your insightful thoughts on this very confusing controversy.Now off to do research..and will comment later
you could very well be on to something!

Originally posted by alphabetaone
The blatant reaction and subsequent retraction from the DoD. It's classic and stands out strongly. I always trust the boots on the ground and their first words. It's usually accurate.

(Reuters) - The U.S. special forces team that hunted down Osama bin Laden was under orders to kill the al Qaeda mastermind, not capture him, a U.S. national security official told Reuters. "This was a kill operation," the official said, making clear there was no desire to try to capture bin Laden alive in Pakistan.

Source for Above

Then, the quick "oooops we shouldnt have said that"

Official: Bin Laden Mission Was Kill Or Capture, Not Just Kill Read more: swampland.time.com...

Reuters’ Mark Hosenball is reporting that the U.S. special forces that raided Osama bin Laden’s compound Sunday were under orders to kill the terrorist leader, not capture him. But an administration official tells TIME that the report is not accurate.

Source for Above

Yes, I noticed this too. That it was a kill mission as first statements suggested. But I decided to let the official story stand in its modified form. If it is true though, the most compelling reason I can think of is the avoidance of having a trial where the subject in custody was apprehended by stealth from a foreign country without any extradition. Something that would set a dangerous precedent in international affairs.

Although as far as precedents go, I was surprised to hear Netanyahu praise Obama for "assassinating" Osama. I'm not sure on the accuracy of the translation of the specific word, but that is a huge international shift if it's accurate. One that doesn't seem consistent with the rule of law.

Netanyaho thanks Obama for Assasinating Osama


David Grouchy

now they are saying he didn't resist
he didn't use his wife a a human shield

the human sacrifice angle is a really good one i think OP

it wouldn't matter if the body was real or a double
it is the generated stuff in the minds of the peeps that is the goal

like motivation for war

it all reminds me of the film of Hitler doing a jig after the fall of a Paris
and how the BBC admitted they faked the whole film for propaganda

according to general Hamid Gul on Jones (he beat the russians commanding the Mujahadine)
The CIA was just caught trying to give uranium to the alciaduh types in Pakistan
only it wasn't Pakistani uranium

the new photo is out it sounds like its a photoshop too
*sigh*

Originally posted by davidgrouchy

Although as far as precedents go, I was surprised to hear Netanyahu praise Obama for "assassinating" Osama. I'm not sure on the accuracy of the translation of the specific word, but that is a huge international shift if it's accurate. One that doesn't seem consistent with the rule of law.

Netanyaho thanks Obama for Assasinating Osama

David Grouchy

edit on 3-5-2011 by davidgrouchy because: (no reason given)

Honestly, David, I'm not terribly surprised to hear him phrase it precisely that way. In fact, I will go so far as to say it was intentional. It is Israel's way of forcing the White House into a position "either you're with us or them". With the quick change in stance, at least publicly, the White House has given the illusion of being against terrorism, but not willing to go as far as Israel (just in case), but the closed-door telephone calls speak a different language. Now, Netanyahu knows that Obama is too moderate to go the distance and Israel will have to wait out for another POTUS perhaps, for more aggressive campaigns.

Clearly, Mossad has never had any inhibition about trans-continental assassination, nor do they claim that they don't do it.

Originally posted by davidgrouchy


I can't help but feel that the vatican is going to take the heat for this.

my thought exactly!!

there is one more thing that caught my attention - vial with blood of Pope John Paul II! Actually the whole ceremony of exumation plus blood made a relic sounds too allarming. It occured to me on sunday during the beatification ceremony that something is not quite right and that something bad will happen afterwards.

Insightfull Douriff, I had not thought to
comparison and contrast the lack of a shrine for Osama
vs. the overwhelming evidence of a shrine for the former Pope.
The symmetry around this symbolism seems to line up on all points.


David Grouchy

reply to post by davidgrouchy

have you heard about vatican's chief exorcist Gabriele Amorth claiming that Satan had infiltrated Vatican? Even more so, he claims that some highest ranking clergy are members of satanic sect?
Here is the link to the article:
www.timesonline.co.uk...
and more:
www.vaticans.org.../archives/61-An-interview-with-the-Vaticans-chief-excorcist,-Father-Gabriele.html
So, if taken seriously - his claims are throwing new lights to the deeper symbolic meaning of the beatification ceremony.
It is hard not to see omnious sacrificial elements, resembling voodoo blood rite.