Saturday, March 16, 2019

Cardinal Godfried Danneels, a key backer of Bergoglio (Pope Francis) has died 03-15-2019

Today, it was announced that Cardinal Godfried Danneels died.  His life was not without controversy and his position on the New Age Movement was literally and figuratively "all over the map."  He was quoted in A CHURCH IN SEARCH OF ITSELF as saying his theology changed daily. Catholic anti-New Age activist and author Donna Steichen once sent me a copy of a well written book published under his name, Christ or Aquarius:  Exploring the New Age Movement.  That book is lurking somewhere within my large personal library.  I'm still searching and at times, it seems like looking for a needle in a haystack.  That book was released in 1992.  After that, however, Danneels, the former president of Pax Christi, which under the American leadership of Detroit Auxiliary Bishop Thomas Gumbleton, had taken some noticeably New Age turns. 

Cardinal Ratzinger (Pope Benedict XVI) had taken strong stands against the New Age Movement as had former Pope John Paul II.  I rather suspect that if Danneels daily changing theology was still anti-New Age, he might not have been so militantly opposed to Pope Benedict XVI.  Danneels proudly proclaimed himself part of a "mafia" that was determined to advance the Catholic Church 200 years in the future.  Towards that end, he enthusiastically supported Pope Francis (former Cardinal Bergoglia of Argentina).  Pope Francis, to my observation, does not appear in the least to be anti-New Age.

Where did Cardinal Danneels end up?  That is for the God whom we will all eventually have to face in Judgment to determine.  I hope, as I do for everybody, that it was on the "side of the Angels". 

Stay tuned?


P.S.  I noticed that Baker Book House has copies of Danneel's 1992 book in stock for a reasonable price.   I gave up on finding it and have ordered another copy. 


1 – 200 of 316   Newer›   Newest»
RayB said...

Dear Constance,

I hope you don't take this personally, because it is not meant to be. But, I have to say, I find several of your statements to be more than a little odd. For example, your statement regarding Pope Benedict and John Paul II: "Cardinal Ratzinger (Pope Benedict XVI) had taken strong stands against the New Age Movement as had former Pope John Paul II."

Both Benedict & JP II actively promoted a VERY New Age concept, that being, an attempt to bring all of the world's "religions" together under one "god." Francis has carried on this false crusade as well. How exactly can one be "strong" against the NAM while supporting one of its major objectives? Aside from their "stand" on the NAM, both promoted the utterly false "gospel" of Rome. So where exactly is it an advantage to elevate either one of these, or, for that matter, ANY "pope?"

You also stated: "Where did Cardinal Danneels end up? That is for the God whom we will all eventually have to face in Judgment to determine. I hope, as I do for everybody, that it was on the "side of the Angels".

Please forgive me for being so blunt, but where does Scripture proclaim or even imply in any appreciable way that salvation is contingent upon being on the "side of the Angels?" I really hate to say this, but this vague statement struck me as something a New Ager would utter.

Regarding Cardinal Danneels; assuming he believed in the "salvation" as dogmatically proclaimed by Rome, he died believing in multiple heresies, as in too numerous to list here. But for one, and it's a big one, Rome's "salvation" is dependent upon the obedience to their strict, Sacramental, merit system of works that is the very antithesis of "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast." Eph. 2:8,9 Literally dozens of other very distinct verses, along with entire passages can be quoted as well to show that no one can "work" their way into heaven, but must rely on faith in Christ alone for His FINISHED, redemptive work. AND, such faith must firmly stand upon the REAL Christ of the Bible, and not upon a FALSE Christ that is based upon one heresy after another.

Like all Catholics, the "best" Cardinal Danneels could have hoped for was an undeterminable amount of time spent suffering in the Catholic fiction called Purgatory, in "payment" for the "sins" that somehow were missed by Christ on the cross! The very claim of Purgatory's existence is in itself a direct denial of Christ's ONCE, NEVER TO BE REPEATED, all encompassing, "it is finished" redemptive death upon the cross through His shed blood. (The Sacrifice of the Mass is another blasphemous denial, in that Christ continues to be "re-sacrificed" upon Rome's altars).

With all of your in depth understanding that you possess regarding the NAM, I really find it hard to understand why there remains such a blind spot when it comes to Roman Catholicism. It truly is baffling.


Anonymous said...

RayB has read neither the archives of this website nor the teachings of the church fathers.

He also doesn't have the benefit of understanding an anti-causal system, something he would have learned in an electrical engineering or higher math curriculum. This is why he doesn't understand the connection through time of either the Old Testament animal sacrificial system to the cross of Christ, or the New Testament Divine Liturgy or sacrifice of the mass.

Anonymous said...

RayB, I honestly have to say thank you for the above statement. Because you were not unkind in what you said, but rather, direct as needful, and I agree with you.
That said, I do think we have to be careful with words though, as we do not truly know what a person means by them because we can't see inside their hearts, so with regards to Constance words, I give her the benefit of the doubt as she intends to be gracious and rightly so, and is upholding belief that bases upon Christ as she does so. I find her words almost too smooth to befit the awful hypocrisies and outright crimes of these who say they speak for the Lord as Roman Catholics (the higher ups and their very "status" is problematic right there), but absolutely betray the very belief they say they have in Christ Jesus as Savior and Lord by the reprehensible behaviors they allow, based on bad doctrine that does not leave all authority to God, but walks lock step with their own brand of "authority" instead (for a very long time too, I might add). A very grevious error indeed and many, so many, are led astray by it. The record shows there has been deep compromise with other religions before this current pope, because they do not stand firm upon the bedrock of Scripture themselves. An open door by which those many extremes have been done, in Jesus' Holy Name, no less. Of course, it is not only Catholics with this problem, but what we are discussing in this thread.
We are not the judge, the Lord is, so I agree with you in your strong and right stand against clear wrongs that are very plain in broad daylight, yet I commend Constance that she "errs on the side of grace", the very grace you defended, and well explained.

In all it's complexity, it will be GOD who sorts all this matter, and I, and no doubt others, will be glad for that day to come when everyone will be on the same page of understanding about Who God is, and how He is to be worshiped. It will be Him to sort all human souls, among them, those whom He has saved and those whom He must banish...those who truly take God for His Word and are saved by the once for all time Sacrifice of Jesus Christ the Savior, spelled out and delineated by Scripture, who believe and live as though He really is LORD in all earthly, and heavenly things, and those who will find they fell short of the extreme mercy found alone in Christ because they trusted in something, or someone other than Him, lived by their own resource and recourse of religiousness, took a detour from the path to life (Christ Alone), to the loss of their very souls in a damned eternity.

Maybe, maybe not, but I think I am hearing both hearts on this matter, yours and the heart of Constance Cumbey, too.
Just sounding out what I think and feel here because it is a big and important topic.

paul said...

Yeah, shame on you Ray B for not being a Roman Catholic theologian, and only living in the present time and not speculating wildly enough about what might happen in the future.
So unEDucated.
Maybe if you had attended RC theology classes for five or six years, you too could now be a gay doctor of Theology who has learned how to justify anything and everything; you know, like the Pope does.
I apparently also don't "understand the connection through time of either the Old Testament animal sacrificial system to the cross of Christ, or the New Testament Divine Liturgy or sacrifice of the mass" either, ...but at least I know that I'm stupid.
Maybe the anonymous theologian could try to explain it to us idiots, in small words, perhaps using simple metaphors to refer to children toys and stuff ?
Here I am foolishly trying to understand the Bible by praying and asking for the Holy Spirit to enlighten me as to the meaning of the words of Jesus and the Apostles, who all had their PhD's in philosophy and literature...oh whoops, wait did they? Oh yeah that would have been Paul only. Jesus was a carpenter and Peter was of course a fisherman and we don't know exactly what the others did, but they must have been highly highly educated, in say, electrical engineering, for instance. Carpentry and fishing were just hobbies of theirs.
The Vatican is not really corrupt at all. It's just way way over our heads in terms of complex future system topologies in a sort of uber-erudite theoretical way that most people will never be able to process.

Dan Bryan said...

Yes RayB, it must be true that you are bereft of anything it is understood of the Anti-causal system.
You should know that for instance, that God must acknowledge the words of the pontiff and bow to Roman Tradition.
You should know that the church is the interpreter of God’s word, even though her exegesis on the Bible cannot be known, much less found.
You should also understand that Constance may trying to find a way to embrace that system with her Ninety-five love notes?
That it might prove more beneficial that she should submit herself to a local parish priest?
That maybe your suggestion should better be expressed to Constance, that she should submit herself to the Roman Church instead of trying to heal it from the outside?
It appears that you are just a baffled with the Roman Church as Constance is?
Is it really a stretch to understand that the Roman Catholic Church always had and taught a different ‘Christ’?
Is it hard to understand that this RCC is never preached the same gospel?
Or that it has extended bridges to every foul tradition so long as they expressed their submission to the Pontix Maximus?
As Popeye always said, ‘I Yam what I AM’. The Roman Church ‘IS what it IS’.
Could it be that once you come to the realization that there is no reforming it; you will find as I have that the protest should be over?

Anonymous said...

The Phrase Finder

The meaning and origin of the expression: On the side of the angels

What's the meaning of the phrase 'On the side of the angels'?

(Originally) Supporting the theory of the divine creation.

(More commonly) Acting in accordance with principles regarded as morally virtuous.

What's the origin of the phrase 'On the side of the angels'?

'On the side of the angels' is one of the linguistic rarities in that is believed to have an unambiguous origin. At the Sheldonian Theatre, Oxford on 25th November 1864 Benjamin Disraeli, later to become the UK Prime Minister, delivered a speech entitled Church Policy, a transcript of which which was put into print the same year. The speech was rather long and included Disraeli's views on Darwin's Theory of Evolution laid out in the recently published On the Origin of Species:

What is the question now placed before society with a glib assurance the most astounding? The question is this - Is man an ape or an angel? (loud laughter) My lord, I am on the side of the angels (laughter and cheering).

The meeting was chaired by the Bishop of Oxford and the audience was largely made up of clerics - hence the loud cheers indicated in the citation. Disraeli stirred up considerable debate by his comments and a rather satirical cartoon of him portrayed as an angel was published soon after the debate.

So, the meaning of 'on the side of the angels', as indicated by Disraeli, was 'supporting the view that man was divinely created and refuting Darwinism'. This meaning is now almost forgotten and the expression is now used colloquially to mean 'with the good guys'.

Anonymous said...

That was helpful 3:06 PM. Thanks.

Anonymous said...

‘Stop looking at these kids as heroes,’ says veteran who made documentary featuring wartime footage of Marines

In a still from ''Combat Obscura,'' a film that uses footage shot in Afghanistan by a Marine, a U.S Marine appears to smoke marijuana out of a makeshift bong while deployed to Afghanistan in 2011-12.


March 15, 2019

KABUL, Afghanistan — Former Marine Miles Lagoze hopes his film “Combat Obscura” will alter the “sanitized and sanctified view of the military” many Americans hold by showing them his view of what combat is actually like.

“It’s important because if you worship the military too much, you lose track of why we’re actually at war and the underlying issues that are causing it,” Lagoze told Stars and Stripes during a phone interview before the film’s release on Friday.

The documentary — a patchwork of scenes showing Marines smoking marijuana while on patrol in Afghanistan, defecating outside the homes of locals, swearing at children and talking lightly of killing innocent people — goes far to challenge the ubiquitous label of “hero” frequently bestowed on American servicemembers.

The cultural insensitivity on display may also give viewers the feeling that they’re getting an explanation, or at least part of one, as to why America’s longest war — now in its 18th year — hasn’t been won.

Footage used in the film was taken by Lagoze, then a lance corporal, and other combat cameramen during a deployment to Helmand province with the 1st Battalion, 6th Marine Regiment between 2011 and 2012.

Lagoze’s job as a combat cameraman was to shoot and edit video of Marines at war. After being approved by the military, the footage was distributed to private news networks and the American Forces Network.

A video Lagoze shot of a November 2011 attack on Patrol Base Georgetown in Helmand’s Kajaki Sofla was picked up by CNN that winter and billed it as a “rare, firsthand glimpse into a battle with the Taliban” and an “unfiltered look” at the war.

The video shows a platoon taking indirect fire, 30 mm grenades and sniper fire. They’re still beating back the attackers when they have to coordinate a medical evacuation for a wounded comrade.

The 5-minute video, one of several of his the Pentagon publicly shared on its own websites, earned Lagoze a first place prize for combat documentary in the 2011 Visual Information Awards Program run by the military’s public affairs school. But the hourlong “Combat Obscura” includes footage the Marine Corps never approved for release.

“We filmed what they wanted, but then we kept shooting,” text at the beginning of the film reads. Its website calls it the “documentary the Corps does not want you to see.”

Initial threats of legal action by the Marine Corps against Lagoze for using footage apparently shot on government equipment substantiate that claim.

Previously, Lagoze has said he hadn’t considered making the material into a full-length documentary until after he enrolled in film school at Columbia University and realized what he had.

Working with the Knight First Amendment Institute at the school, he pushed back against the military’s threats, a Columbia University statement said.

After a preliminary inquiry by the Naval Criminal Investigation Service, military officials have decided not to pursue litigation against Lagoze or any of those depicted in the film “at this time,” said Marine spokesman Maj. Brian Block in an emailed statement.

“The potentially criminal activity captured ... is inexcusable and selfish and endangered the security of the Marines in that unit,” Block said. “Unfortunately, the statute of limitations for pursuing disciplinary action has passed.”

Anonymous said...

That activity includes Marines apparently smoking pot in several scenes, including one in which a Marine appears to be rolling a joint in front of Afghan children and his colleague jokes about marrying an underage girl.

“You join the Marine Corps, you think the Marine Corps is like a bunch of perfect people, you know, that don’t do anything bad,” another Marine says in a different scene after smoking. “But the Marine Corps is full of the most [obscenity] individuals I’ve ever met. Just like me, you know?”

The speaker is the only person in the film who asked to have his face blurred, according to Lagoze, who said most of the men in the movie were happy for the public to see what their combat experience was actually like.

“I think ... veterans of this war are at a point where we’re sick of the hero worshiping and the sugarcoating of the experience and a lot of us are sick of people saying, ‘thank you for your service,’ without actually getting in a real conversion about what we did and what happened,” Lagoze said.

Distributed by Oscilloscope Laboratories, the film is being released in a small number of theaters and became available to buy or rent on iTunes on Friday.

While images of Marines smoking marijuana and swearing will be seen as a blemish by some on the branch’s image, other scenes in the film are more disturbing and consequential.

In a still from ''Combat Obscura,'' a film that uses footage shot in Afghanistan by a Marine, two marines help a fellow servicemember wounded in a firefight in Helmand province sometime during their 2011 to 2012 deployment.

“I don’t care right now about their customs or their courtesies,” a Marine says in one part of the film before his men interrupt a religious service at a rural compound. After detaining the men there for what appears to be several hours, it’s revealed the “high-value individuals” being sought are not there.

In another scene, a patrol arrives to examine the body of a suspected Taliban fighter who has been shot dead. “Just like a deer,” one Marine says of the corpse as others talk to the lifeless body. The group quickly realizes the man was an unarmed shopkeeper.

The Marines discuss covering up the killing as the man’s body is shown being wrapped in a carpet, with one saying, “This is no good for people to see.”

Due to a lack of narration giving context to the raw footage, it’s often unclear exactly what is happening during the seemingly arbitrary assortment of scenes. But as the film progresses, a sense of the troops’ insensitivity and hubris becomes palpable.

The Marines in the film appear unsuited to the counterinsurgency strategy that U.S. commanders were pursuing at the time, focused on winning the trust of the Afghans.

“The behavior and actions depicted in this film do not live up to the high standards we expect of our Marines and do not represent the experience or attitudes of the vast majority of Marines who deploy and served with honor and distinction in Afghanistan,” said Block, the spokesman.

Lagoze admitted that “there are a lot of different types of guys in the military,” but that his film is an accurate experience of his deployment to Afghanistan as a 21-year-old, seven years ago.

“I thought it was important to document as much as I could,” Lagoze said. “It was important to the guys who I was filming that I was capturing as much of the reality as possible.”
Twitter: @pwwellman

Craig said...

The ‘Sacrifice of the Mass’ centers on a particular exegesis of the ‘Bread of Life’ discourse in John 6, viewing it as sacramental. It’s important to note that not all ‘church fathers’ interpreted it the RCC way (Clement of Alexandria, Origen, and Augustine, e.g.). Having just finished a blog post on the Passion sequence leading up to Pilate’s inscription over the cross as in John’s Gospel, it became obvious to me—for the first time, I’ll add—what ‘eat my flesh and drink my blood’ really signifies.

John is at pains to fashion his entire Gospel into one in which Christ is the Passover Lamb (1:29), to the extent of depicting Jesus’ last meal as the night before Passover, on the eve of the Day of Preparation (according to Jewish days, each runs from sunset to nightfall). Comparatively, the last meal in the Synoptics appears to be the Passover meal. There is no mention of a Passover meal (which would begin at sundown on Passover Sabbath, after Jesus’ death) in John’s Gospel. Why? Because there was and is no longer a need for a Passover meal! With Jesus’ sacrificial death on the Day of Preparation—the day when priests would begin sacrificing their unblemished male lambs—He Himself was the final Passover sacrifice.

Both eating flesh and drinking blood were strictly forbidden in the OT. So, the interpretation can in no way be quasi-literal. Even if a Jew would have seen some sort of connection between Moses’ manna and Jesus as the true manna, they would have bristled at the notion of ‘eating’ Jesus. So, this is not about eating or drinking in any quasi-literal sense.

Exodus 12 explains the Old Covenant Passover. Once the lamb is sacrificed, some of its blood is to be put on the lintel (horizontal post over the door) and on the (vertical) door posts. Where was Jesus’ blood shed? On the horizontal and vertical beams of the cross. The remainder of the lamb—completely intact including head, legs, and internal organs—was to be roasted on the fire. Jesus’ entire body, His entire flesh, died on the cross. Thus, ‘eating His body and drinking His blood’ merely means understanding Jesus’ sacrifice as the replacement for the Exodus Passover. In other words, ‘eating Jesus’ flesh and drinking His blood’ is to embrace the Messiah’s death on the cross as the once-for-all-time fulfillment of the Passover sacrifice and to recognize that the celebration of the Passover as per the OT instructions is no longer necessary. This is the requirement to “have eternal life”.

There is likely another connection to ‘flesh and blood’ intended. Besides the Bread of Life discourse, the only time these two terms appear together is in 1:13. Those who believe in Christ’s name receive the authority to become Children of God (1:12)—“not from blood(s) nor from desires of the flesh, nor from the will of the husband/man, but of God they are begotten” (1:13). Stated another way, they are begotten of God by ‘eating the flesh and drinking the blood’ of the Messiah, as per the understanding above. This is how one becomes “born again/from above” unto eternal life.

RayB said...


You made some very interesting points.

Just a couple of points that I might add: We need to keep in mind that the RCC's dogma on this is that the Priest has been given Apostolic power to literally change the wafer into the PHYSICAL "body, soul, mind and divinity" of Jesus Christ. By partaking in this sacrament, which can ONLY BE PERFORMED BY A PRIEST, the Catholic is actually "eating" God, and Jesus cannot be "received" in any other manner or method. Without the Eucharist via the Sacrifice of the Mass, the entire false system comes crashing down. Of course the Bible clearly teaches that communion is a memorial of what Jesus suffered and accomplished upon the cross. Eating a "consecrated" wafer, etc. has no eternal merit whatsoever. However, in contrast, the RCC teaches that if a Catholic misses a single Mass on purpose, and then dies, he dies in a state of Mortal Sin, for which he will spend all of eternity in Hell !

Furthermore, Jesus clearly explains what He meant by "eating his flesh, etc." in verse 63 of John 6: "It is the spirit that quickeneth; the FLESH PROFITETH NOTHING: the words that I speak unto you, THEY ARE SPIRIT, and THEY are LIFE." (emphasis mine)

RayB said...

Paul & Dan Bryan:

It sure looks like we're all in the same, ignorant, un-edukated boat that has done sprung a big leak.

What we all need is some higher learnin so we can all get some what smart folk call understandin. Maybe that "Anon" could teach us all somethin, cause he sure do sound smart.

paul said...

I reckon' so.

Anonymous said...

Why Did Pope Francis Write Such A Strange Paragraph About Cardinal Danneels?
Cardinal Danneels was chosen by the Pope to participate in the Synods on the Family AFTER he was caught on tape advising a man who had been sexually abused by another Belgian bishop to KEEP QUIET ABOUT THE CRIME. It was shocking then, and is still shocking today, that the Pontiff would have chosen to bring a prelate out of retirement — to discuss the problems facing the family, no less — after he had been exposed to public disgrace. Even while loudly insisting that bishops should be held responsible for covering up abuse, the Pope bestowed this honor on a cardinal who was widely recognized as one of his key supporters: as a member of the "St. Gallen mafia" that had backed his election.

Yet now, when Cardinal Danneels died, Pope Francis chose to call attention to that shocking appointment. And Vatican News — which presumably seeks to follow the Pontiff's wishes — did the same. ...Neither the papal statement nor the Vatican News story suggested that Cardinal Danneels had contributed anything of unusual significance to the Synods' discussions. They mentioned only that he was there — at the Pope's invitation.

Reading first the Pope's statement and then the Vatican News story, I had the impression that they were crafted to include an implicit challenge to papal critics: a bold affirmation that the Pope has NO REGRETS, NO SECOND THOUGHTS, about rewarding an old ally.

Anonymous said...


Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

re Eucharist indeed they DID consider it real Body and Blood of Christ. ORigen and Tertullian are NOT Church Fathers the former anathematized post mortem. Tertullian called father of Latin Christianity but became a montanist heretic. Justin Martyr and Ignatius (student of Apostle John) both support Eucharist as Christ's Body and Blood.

JESUS DID NOT CHASE AFTER THOSE LEAVING BECAUSE OF THIS, AND SAY HE ONLY MEANT IT FIGURATIVELY. He spoke literally. And its not either/or, both His words and the bread and wine are His Body and Blood. "whosoever believeth in Him shall not perish but have everlasting life" the thief on the cross hadn't communed, and those who do but without true adherence to Christ won't profit much. timeframe statement would refer to NOT re sacrificing Christ but plugging into that one sacrifice that stands forever.

paul said "The Commandments of God say we should be worshipping him on Saturday, the seventh day"

no. the sabbath was Mosaic specific Exodus 31:17 not observed before that, SUPERCEDED IN CHRIST Colossians 2:16, 17 Galatians is entirely about this focusses on circumcision but the rest is implied.
Food laws NOT until Moses and NOT about health meat not allowed to the godly before the Flood, so what would "clean animals" mean to Noah? clean for sacrifice.
Jer. 31 we are told God will make a new covenant with Israel NOT like the one made with Moses.

re: "private interpretation" context shows is about how prophecy is produced, that an exegete is not a prophet, it is not about interpreting the meaning of Scripture.

re: need of pontificate to trust ANY and all doctrine, all you need is creed and ecumenical councils, one of which excommunicated a pope and NONE OF WHICH WERE CALLED BY A POPE and the famous "peter has spoken" came only AFTER examining the statement to be sure it fit existing theology (and St. Cyril of Alexandria taken as a benchmark on the issue).

Its as if they think, if the pope isn't real, then Christ is not risen from the dead. BUT CHRIST'S RESURRECTION IS THE BASIS FOR THE PAPACY NOT VICE VERSA AND WAS ATTESTED BY ALL APOSTLES NOT JUST PETER AND 500 OTHER WITNESSES BESIDES. RC has built itself a dangerous house of cards, aside from other issues.

Barnhardt may have a problem, she has strange eyes a youtube commenter noted, maybe speaks of the dangers of the occult side of narcisissm ("demonic narcisissm") from some experience. incl. fighting it in herself. on her page her insistance her landlord not do his own dishes she saw as love and female role but he saw as nuisance and probably as domination (which it evidently is) she may have a narcisissm problem of some degree herself.

RayB as for calling bergoglio a faggot without testimony note she writes "(I’ve received new information out of Buenos Aires – his private life was a deplorable scandal)" shows she DOES have such testimony. refusal to be nicey nice is not a personal attack because it is calling it what it is. As for using harsh language being unscriptural, consider Jesus cleansing the Temple, or calling Pharisees vipers and rotting corpses in whited sepulchres.

Vatican currently seems to argue that non RC Christians are incl. in a weak way in the ark of salvation, present acceptance of EO is also against earlier stances medieval pope specified we are outside of salvation because rejecting the papacy. check RC trad sources. Benedict XVI said prot churches are "sodalities" where they may find salvation, but not legitimate i.e., sacramental churches. refutes Dullheimer's blavatskyite position.

Aquinas opposed Immaculate Conception, refuting all but one version, which last was chosen later to represent it. however, it is self refuting - If God needed her CONCEIVED immaculately then her mother needed to be conceived immaculately also, etc. etc. AND her father!

RayB said...

It has never been easier for despotic governments to exercise absolute control over its citizens:

PS: these are the very same despots that "pope" Francis "trusted" to appoint Catholic/Communist Bishops in China.

Craig said...


No one here mentioned Tertullian on this thread, so I’m not sure why you brought him up (though more on him below). I’m aware of the issues surrounding Origen. If you’re responding to my comment above, you’ll note that I used ‘church fathers’ in single quotes. There is no monolithic group called “Church Fathers”, as if they were all in 100% agreement on all things theological, and I refuse to capitalize the term. One may choose to call this one or that one a “Saint” (not saying you did) if one wants to adhere to some sort of extra-Biblical ‘tradition’, but the NT says all believers are “saints”. In any case, I chose the term ‘church fathers’ as a short cut to reference the fact that not all interpreted John 6 sacramentally, quasi-literally.

Now, regarding Tertullian, we are not certain he actually became a heretic/schismatic. See wiki (and footnote references):

In middle life (about 207), he was attracted to the "New Prophecy" of Montanism, though today most scholars reject Saint Jerome's assertion that Tertullian ever left the mainstream Church or was ever excommunicated.[23] "[W]e are left to ask whether [Saint] Cyprian could have regarded Tertullian as his master if Tertullian had been a notorious schismatic. Since no ancient writer was more definite (if not indeed fanatical) on this subject of schism than Cyprian, the question must surely be answered in the negative."[24]

It doesn’t matter to me how many early writers are claimed to have believed in the ‘real presence’. First of all, unless and until I can read the texts as these individuals wrote them (as opposed to someone else’s assertions, which may just be parroting another’s faulty statement), I am not going to say this one believes thus-and-so and that one said ‘this’. Second, a wafer and grape juice have absolutely no salvific, soteriological efficacy, no matter which priest waves his ‘magical’ hands. Christ’s finished sacrifice is all that is needed. “Do this in remembrance of Me.” Not ‘drink my literal flesh and blood’. Next I’ll be told to literally gouge out my eye (Matthew 5:29).

You wrote:

re: "private interpretation" context shows is about how prophecy is produced, that an exegete is not a prophet, it is not about interpreting the meaning of Scripture.

On that we agree (assuming I fully understand your usual clipped, twisted syntax). Peter is not writing some sort of apologetic against individuals interpreting Scriptures. Those who use this as a proof-text in that manner are merely trying to stifle legitimate debate.

Craig said...

Did Ignatius really teach the ‘real presence’? This blogger, a former Roman Catholic, read his writings and illustrates otherwise. It appears he takes the writings from the English rather than going to the Greek which I’d recommend instead, though I’m not saying he’s wrong, I think he’s right, having read other things on this blog before. So, with that said, here’s what he says:

But if Ignatius is to take the stand in defense of a complex doctrine like Transubstantiation—in which Aristotelian substance theory and its essence and accidents are elucidated to explain the substance of flesh and blood under the accidental appearance of bread and wine—then his [Ignatius’] penchant for metaphorical flourish will have to be brought forward as well. Ignatius cannot be used to dismiss a Protestant metaphorical interpretation of John 6 when his own preferred mode of communication was itself metaphorical. That is to say, Rome cannot use Ignatius’ use of figures that are “not literally applicable,” in order to prove that he believed the figures were “literally applicable.”

The author then goes on to quote from Ignatius’ texts and how “flesh”, “blood”, and other terms are used metaphorically in service of different ends. Near the end he writes:

…In particular, because [Ignatius] used the Eucharist as a thematic metaphor in his letters, varying its meaning according to the message, we can see that Rome’s understanding of Ignatius is grossly deficient. Roman Catholicism relies on Ignatius for support of Transubstantiation when he was simply wielding the Eucharist as a metaphor for the actual flesh of Christ against the [proto-]Gnostics who said He had not really come in the flesh, and had not really suffered. Had Ignatius been less metaphorical in his writing, and had he been less prone to apply the metaphors of flesh, blood, leaven, wheat and bread so freely, Roman Catholic apologists, priests and popes might have had a case for early belief in the “real presence.” As matters stand, they do not.

As we noted in The Rise of Roman Catholicism, the religion of Rome struggles mightily to prove that her doctrines originated any earlier than the latter part of the fourth century. On the matter of Transubstantiation and the “real presence,” Ignatius was their last, best hope to bridge that 300-year gap. As thin as the evidence is for early Roman Catholicism, we are tempted to be sympathetic to their apologists who must stretch Ignatius to the breaking point to fill in centuries of missing dogma. But Ignatius is of no help to them.

RayB said...

Christine writes regarding Ann Barnhardt:

"RayB as for calling bergoglio a faggot without testimony note she writes "(I’ve received new information out of Buenos Aires – his private life was a deplorable scandal)" shows she DOES have such testimony." (sic)

Amazing, but then again, it comes from our wise sage Christine. Christine validates Barnhardt's unsubstantiated claim ("on the testimony of 2 or more witnesses) based upon Barnhardt's unpublished claim that she "received new information out of Buenos Aires ..." If the "information" has been vetted and proven to be true, why is it that Barnhardt does not provide us with that information?

I'm no supporter in any way, shape or form of "pope" Francis. I am totally opposed, from a Biblical stand point, of the Papacy and the entire false system and claims of the RCC. BUT, attacking ANYONE on such unproven hearsay is flat out wrong and un-Biblical.

J said...

RayB 9:22 AM,

Your points seem nit-picky and hypercritical in the grand scheme of things. You almost make Constance out to be a Catholic apologist. And parsing her colloquial reference to "on the side of the angels" as if she meant it as literal theology -- come on -- you have to know better than that.

Yes, you may be literally and technically correct about certain points, but do you really suspect that Constance is a stealth Catholic apologist?

I think you may be stepping over dollars to pick up pennies.

This whole thing is about more than just the Catholic church. Yet you seldom seem concerned about New Age issue beyond your anti-Catholicism. You seem quite fixated on that quite narrowly and repetitiously.

Can you really be so naive about Constance? If so, I invite you to reassure yourself by reading her blog archives and reading her book before you rush to judgement one more time.

RayB said...

Can a person "just believe in Jesus" and attend a Catholic Church and be considered a Christian by the Catholic Church?

The quick and authoritative answer is a resounding NO ! Why? Because according to RCC doctrine and dogmas, a person must obey the 7 Sacraments of their "Apostolic" system. It is important to note that only a RCC priest can administer these sacraments. Obviously, the clear path of "faith through grace" has been severely muddled.

What are the 7 Sacraments?

1) Baptism ... a person (much more often a Baby) has been "born again" and has entered into a state of grace and now is allowed to become a participant in the Sacramental system.

2) Confirmation ... a person "receives the Holy Spirit by the Priest anointing the forehead with chrism, together with the laying on of the minister's hands and the words, "Be sealed with the Gift of the Holy Spirit." The recipient receives the seven gifts of the Holy Spirit: wisdom, understanding, counsel, fortitude, knowledge, piety, and fear of the Lord.

3) Eucharist ... the "source and summit of Christian life." By the Priest pronouncing the words of consecration spoken by Jesus at the Last Supper: "This is my body...This is the cup of my blood..." the bread and wine through Transubstantiation become the Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ, and we receive the Real Presence of Jesus when we receive Holy Communion. (i.e. they EAT "god")

4) Confession ... the Priest has "the power to forgive sins." The sacrament involves three steps: the penitent's contrition or sorrow for his sins, the actual confession to a priest and absolution, and then penance or restitution for your sins.

Anonymous said...

RayB 11:33 AM,

One question: do you think several billion individuals attending the Catholic church are definitively *not* a part of the true spiritual church? Or do you think God decides that?

J said...

This is how I would understand it. Teachers have more authority and more accountability. The Pope, having so much authority, has so much accountability as well. But the billions of church goers will not be judged as harshly. I think it's a Bible basic that people with authority and people who are teachers are held more accountable.

Another Bible basic is that sinning knowingly and deliberately and from the heart is not judged the same as "knowing not what you do". I think early church fathers who made errors of doctrine may not be as accountable as a Pope who knowingly perverts doctrine, for example.

I doubt if any of us have perfect theology or attend a perfect church, but if we know better we then have more responsibility weighing on our conscience.

The ignorant and innocent whose hearts are true do not have the same accountability. In other words you can pray with a sincere heart with hail Marys and a rosary, innocent that it says in scripture that God does not like vain repetition. But if you know that scripture, and you still persist, it may be different.

These matters are for God to decide.

RayB said...


5) The Annointing of the Sick ... in the past, it was often referred to as "Extreme Unction" or "The Last Rites." The Sacrament consists of the anointing of the forehand and hands of the person with BLESSED OIL, with the minister saying, "Through this holy anointing may the Lord in his love and mercy help you with the grace of the Holy Spirit. May the Lord who frees you from sin save you and raise you up."

6) Holy Orders .... establishes the claim of "Apostolic Succession." The rite consists of the Bishop's laying on of hands on the head of the priest-candidate with the consecrating prayer asking God for the outpouring of the Holy Spirit for the gifts of the ministry. There are three dimensions to ministry, that of Bishop, Priesthood, and the Diaconate. (Note: many of the same "Bishops" have been involved in the most grievous of sins, including all that entails regarding the Pedophile/Priest scandals, etc.).

7) Marriage ... through this Sacrament, the couple is IMPARTED the GRACE to grow into a union of heart and soul, to continue life, and to provide stability for themselves and their children. Rich and powerful Catholics are often granted "Abolution" of their marriage so that they can then "marry" another via the Sacrament of Marriage. Infamously, the late Sen. Ted Kennedy, a lifelong serial adulterer, received an "Absolution" (wonder how much $$$ that cost?) for his 1st. marriage, which produced 3 children. Didn't matter; the "marriage" was absolved.

RayB said...

Regarding the above; notice that there is one obstacle that remains in place between God and man, and that is the Priest. It is ONLY through the office of the Priest, which is given his power through his Bishop, who in turn receives his power from the Pope, that a Catholic finds a pathway to Jesus Christ.

Anonymous said...

Baptists by contrast have the doctrine of "the priesthood of all believers".

What authority do you think a priest of pastor has, if any?

Should we just dispense with churches and priests, pastors, ministers, etc?

RayB said...

It is NOT a "Baptist" doctrine, but rather, a clear Biblical doctrine.

The office of "Priest," along with OT sacrifices, was an Old Testament concept that was a "type" of sacrifice that pointed to the future death of the Messiah. The sacrificial system was done away with at the crucifixion of Jesus Christ, as illustrated by the rending of the veil of the Temple:

"Jesus, when he had cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost. And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent; And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose, And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many." Matthew 27: 50-53

To this day, the sacrificial system of the OT has never been re-instituted.

Here, Peter is writing to believers in the Lord Jesus Christ, who were formerly unbelieving gentiles:

"Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an HOLY PRIESTHOOD, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ." I Peter 2:5

"Wherefore also it is contained in the scripture, Behold, I lay in Sion a chief corner stone, elect, precious: and he that believeth on him shall not be confounded. Unto you therefore which believe he is precious: but unto them which be disobedient, the stone which the builders disallowed, the same is made the head of the corner, And a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offense, even to them which stumble at the word, being disobedient: whereunto also they were appointed. But YE ARE A CHOSEN GENERATION, a ROYAL PRIESTHOOD, AN HOLY NATION, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light: Which in time past were not a people, but are now the people of God: which had not obtained mercy, but now have obtained mercy." I Peter 2: 6-10

It is VERY interesting that the supposed "1st. Pope" Peter is actually the one that God chose to write about the "Priesthood" of all believers! In fact, NOT A SINGLE peculiar "doctrine or dogma" held by the RCC is even remotely mentioned in either of Peter's two epistles ... NOT A ONE !

Anonymous said...

The TRUE St. Patrick's Day

Anonymous said...

RayB 12:57 PM,

I said nothing about the sacrificial system. I have no disagreement there.

You didn't answer my question. I will very precisely ask point blank: Are there spiritual leadership roles with an intended, legitimate function delineated by scripture?

Anonymous said...

You know that the household of Stephanas were the first converts in Achaia, and they have devoted themselves to the service of the saints. I urge you, brothers, to submit to such as these and to everyone who joins in the work, and labors at it. . . Such men deserve recognition.
- 1 Cor. 16:15-18

Now we ask you, brothers, to respect those who work hard among you, who are over you in the Lord and who admonish you. Hold them in the highest regard in love because of their work. Live in peace with each other.
- 1 Thes. 5:12,13

Anonymous said...

Acts 20:28

"Be on guard for yourselves and for all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood.

John 21:15-17

So when they had finished breakfast, Jesus said to Simon Peter, "Simon, son of John, do you love Me more than these?" He said to Him, "Yes, Lord; You know that I love You " He said to him, "Tend My lambs." He said to him again a second time, "Simon, son of John, do you love Me?" He said to Him, "Yes, Lord; You know that I love You." He said to him, "Shepherd My sheep." He said to him the third time, "Simon, son of John, do you love Me?" Peter was grieved because He said to him the third time, "Do you love Me?" And he said to Him, "Lord, You know all things; You know that I love You " Jesus said to him, "Tend My sheep.

Ephesians 4:11-13

And He gave some as apostles, and some as prophets, and some as evangelists, and some as pastors and teachers, for the equipping of the saints for the work of service, to the building up of the body of Christ; until we all attain to the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a mature man, to the measure of the stature which belongs to the fullness of Christ.

Anonymous said...

P.S. To my 1:05 PM

RayB said...

Anon said to RayB @ 1:15 PM:

"You didn't answer my question. I will very precisely ask point blank: Are there spiritual leadership roles with an intended, legitimate function delineated by scripture?"

My answer:

Of course there are, as described and under the limitations of Scripture, which is FAR different from the all-authoritative, no access to Jesus Christ except via the Sacraments as ADMINISTERED through the Priest craft of Roman Catholicism.

Anonymous said...

RayB 1:37 PM,

Well, the RCC is over 2,000 years old. It originated in a very superstitious and authoritarian society. Does that accident of history negate every basic teaching of Catholic theology, though? Does it mean no Catholics are saved? Does it mean no RCC priests are faithful shepherds of Jesus' flock, and none ever have been in the history of the world?

J said...

People used to have no structural models for things that we take for granted now. For example anybody can write a letter to an editor, but we still have editors. But editors follow standards of grammar. We have models that combine some sort of external standard with some kind of hierarchy and leadership but still allow some kind of layperson participation and talk back.

Would people of 2,000 years ago have been able to understand, accept and participate n this type of structure? Or maybe they would have just searched for a stonger leader if they didn't think a leader seemed authoritative enough to them?

RayB said...

Anon @ 1:55 PM ...

Your claim that the RCC is "over 2,000 years old" is not based upon Biblical or historical fact. First and foremost, Peter was NOT the "first pope," moreover, Peter was never a "pope." Nowhere in Scripture is there even a hint that such an office even exists. Furthermore, there is absolutely no Biblical or historical proof that Peter ever was in Rome. Also, if Peter were the "first pope," how is it that the Apostle Paul severely corrected him for attempting to saddle the Gentile converts with obeying OT practices, such as circumcision (see the Epistle to Galatians). While Peter wrote a total of 2 epistles, Paul wrote 13.

Historically, the primacy of the Bishop of Rome did not occur until decades after the reign of Roman Emperor Constantine (324-337 AD). It was the Emperor Constantine that declared "christianity" the state religion of Rome (his version of it that is). It was Constantine that married some aspects of his perception of "Christianity" with Roman Babylonian inspired Paganism, precisely why there are so many RCC practices, dogmas and "holy" days that have their roots firmly planted in that corrupt tree.

Prior to the "primacy" of the Roman Bishop, which evolved over centuries, there was no "Roman Catholic Church." What existed to the HUMAN EYE was a conglomeration of churches that were led by regional "Bishops." These various church areas, primarily located within the geographical areas of Europe and Eurasia were unofficially simply referred to as "the Church." You will find nothing prior to this time that indicates that the Bishop of Rome ruled over these Bishops! So your claim that the RCC is "over 2,000 years old" is simply not based upon fact, but rather, it is just another RCC invented fiction that is being used as a means to help maintain their hold over the souls of a billion+ people.

The "true Church" is the universal body of believers that are united in Spirit that have been Born Again through Christ. It is not a "church" that forces its members into slavishly obeying their man made Sacraments in order to earn their right into Purgatory where they will suffer an undeterminable amount of time to pay for their unforgiven, venial sins.

paul said...

This statement by the angel of God in Revelations 18:6 :
"Come out of her, my people, that you be not partakers of her sins, and that you receive not of her plagues"
_ is proof that Gods own beloved people can be in a very wrong place but still have strong a tendency to stay there. HE CALLS THEM MY PEOPLE.
It is preceded by; "Babylon the Great is fallen is fallen, and has become the habitation of devils, and the hold of every foul spirit, and a cage of every unclean and hateful bird.
For all nations have drunk of the wine of the wrath of her fornication, and the kings of the earth have committed fornication with her, and the merchants of the earth are waxed rich through the abundance of her delicacies.

If you haven't guessed, this is how I view so many millions of modern day Roman Catholics. Not as pagans, not as idolaters, but as a people misled by the Vatican.
The above description is too accurate to be ignored.

Anonymous said...

RayB 3:48 PM,

Do you think the true church contains any Catholics?

paul said...

I would add to my above statement that people should read Matthew 23, which comes just in front of chapter 24 in which he prophesies about the end of the world in great detail
In chapter 23, Jesus called the leaders of the temple hypocrites and vipers, yet they were teaching much truth, just as they were ordained to do.
So Jesus told his disciples to "do as they teach you but not as they do", because they were hypocrites yet the Word of God was still being taught.
What a weird situation, then and now!

Unknown said...

Ray B said...

The WORDS that I speak to you, they are SPIRIT and they are LIFE. Christ was the WORD that became Flesh (John 1: ) If you eat (eating is an intimate action it nourishes your entire body) his Word, Christ was saying to EAT his Words that he taught and they will give you life.

Craig: Born Again meaning is stated by Christ to Nicodemus. "Unless one is born of the Water and Spirit, they will never enter the Kingdom of God." (John 3:5) One MUST be baptized totally immersed in flowing water not sprinkled.

If the RCC is correct in its ways, then why does God take Ezekiel on a tour of the Temple to show Ezekiel all the abominations being committed by the elders of the Temple? God ordered them killed thereafter.

I marvel at how Catholics defend the abominations in the RCC. The answers are in Scripture as to what wrong they are doing.

Anonymous said...

All of the religious massacres that you DIDN'T hear about over the past year have one thing in common…

Christians were killed instead of Muslims

Sunday, March 17, 2019 by: Ethan Huff

(Natural News) On January 27, Muslim extremists bombed a Roman Catholic cathedral on the Philippine island of Jolo, killing some 20 people and injuring dozens of others. But you probably didn’t hear about this horrific religious massacre because the perpetrators were violent Islamic terrorists that targeted Christians, which means the Leftist media pretty much completely ignored it.

Though they often go unreported, there have actually been hundreds of similar such attacks by Muslims against Christians just within the past year alone, and almost none of them were given national, let alone global, media attention. That’s because the only tragedies that ever get reported by the fake news media are those that propagate an anti-white, anti-gun, and anti-Christian narrative.

Take the most recent alleged gun massacre in New Zealand, for instance. The fake news media won’t shut up about it, for one, and many of these same propaganda outlets are actually making up false narratives about the alleged shooter simply because he’s a white male who supposedly went on a rampage against Muslims while they were worshiping in their mosques.

It’s the perfect scenario for the Leftist media to go nuts with all sorts of crazy narratives blaming white people, conservatives, and even President Trump and his “rhetoric” for this evil act of violence, while also throwing in anti-Second Amendment talking points while they’re at it. But these same disinformation mouthpieces were nowhere to be found when Filipino Christians were murdered in cold blood in the name of Allah – why is that?

After all, both incidents are similar in that a religious group was targeted by deranged terrorists who openly admitted that they were out for innocent blood. The difference, however, is that in the eyes of the Left, it’s perfectly alright for the lives of Christians to be terminated by extremists because that’s considered to be “tolerance.” But when Muslims are targeted, it’s automatically “Islamophobia” and “racism” by white people against brown people.

Muslims murder Christians and other innocents all the time, but the fake news media ignores it all.

The aforementioned religious terror attack that took place in the Philippines was hardly an isolated incident, by the way. It happens all the time, all over the world – though the average person remains completely unaware of it, thanks to a perpetual mainstream media blackout designed to cover up the truth.

As of this writing, there have been 453 Islamic terror attacks in 31 different countries so far this year – and these are just the ones that have been reported. In total, just in 2019 so far, there have been a shocking 1,956 people murdered by Islamic terrorists, and another 2,019 injured, according to

Had each of these incidents been reportedly as widely and aggressively as the most recent New Zealand attack, the general public would clearly see the threat of radical Islamic terrorism... But because such incidents are kept under wraps, there’s a widespread illusion among Leftists that everything is a-okay...

Everyday Leftists are also guilty of willfully covering up this inconvenient truth, especially as they seek to legislatively stop “hate crimes” and “hate speech” against all people groups in this country except, you guessed it: white people and Christian people.

Craig said...


I disagree with your interpretation of John 3:5. The Greek is simply 'begotten of/from water and spirit'. Because the Greek article is used for neither, and "of/from" governs both, it should be seen as one conceptual unit: begotten of water-and-spirit. This is another way of saying 'begotten spiritually'. One is 'begotten/born from above/again' by being 'begotten spiritually'. Thus, it should not be seen as directly referencing baptism or the Holy Spirit. It's in the next verse, 3:6, that the Holy Spirit is first mentioned. Most literally it is "that which has been born of the flesh is flesh, and that which has been born of the Spirit is spirit."

Now I think the "water" in 'water-and-spirit' should be understood as entailing repentance, with 'water' construed as figurative, symbolic for baptismal cleansing. In other words, being begotten spiritually includes repentance. This particular discourse does not reference the practice of baptism directly.

Anonymous said...

How The Media Distorts The New Zealand Shooting To Protect Radical Muslim Jihadis While Demonizing White People

Mike Adams
March 17, 2019

(Natural News) Right on cue, the same lying, corporate media that always claims we “shouldn’t leap to conclusions” when radicalized Muslims carry out acts of terrorism (such as the Orlando night club shooting, or the Paris attacks, etc.) is hyperventilating over the New Zealand mass shooting, claiming that anyone who ever criticized any Muslim is now directly responsible for the killings.

The media has now gone into full-blown “protect the Muslims / demonize the Christians” mode, which is exactly what we’d expect a dishonest, globalist-run news cartel to do. For the record, myself and Natural News insist that it’s wrong to commit against of violence against anyone based on their religion or country of origin. But that is not the position of the left-wing media. To them, violence against Christians, Trump supporters, gun owners or white people is always justified.

Demonstrating the extreme media bias that’s now at play on a daily basis, the way the media responds to mass shootings depends entirely on whether Muslims are the victims or the shooter. If the shooter is Muslim, the media downplays the events and claims the shooter must have been justified, and tells us we shouldn’t paint all Muslims as being responsible for the actions of “one lone gunman.” But if the victims are Muslims, then the narrative goes into cartwheels to blame all white people, all Christians, all Trump supporters, all gun owners and anyone who ever criticized any Muslim, ever (including Ilhan Omar, a Jew-hating member of Congress who is also a Muslim).

The double standard is sickening and impossible to miss. published a fascinating analysis that takes a closer look at how the Huffington Post runs stories that work overtime to protect Muslims and demonize everyone else, even in cases where Muslims carry out mass murder. (The Left in America today has become anti-Israel, anti-Jew, anti-white, anti-America and anti-Christian. They now worship radical Islam, even as they simultaneously promote the same LGBT agenda that gets gays beheaded with machetes in Muslim countries… go figure.)

COMPARE: Media Reaction To Fusion Nightclub Terror Attack Vs Christchurch Terror Attack


Watching the media and establishment reaction to the Christchurch New Zealand has been a sight to behold.

When a Muslim called 911 to publicly pledge allegiance to ISIS moments before slaughtering 49 gay people in the Pulse Nightclub massacre, the media reaction was one of caution. We mustn’t jump to any conclusions about the motives. We mustn’t blame a whole community for the actions of an individual. We mustn’t draw any conclusions about the object of the shooters religious obsessions.

In the case of Omar Mateen, his motive wasn’t radical Islam even though he pledged allegiance to ISIS. No, his motive was big bad evil America killing too many civilians. Just ask Huffington Post:

The gunman who slaughtered 49 people in an Orlando, Florida, nightclub told a police negotiator the attack was a protest against U.S. bombings of Islamic State targets in Iraq and Syria.

”You have to tell the U.S. government to stop bombing. They are killing too many children. They are killing too many women, okay,” gunman Omar Mateen told a police negotiator by phone during the June attack, hours before the killer died in a shootout with police.

Anonymous said...

In his conversations with the police negotiator, Mateen repeatedly complained about civilians killed by U.S. airstrikes in Syria and Iraq. “What am I to do when my people are getting killed over there,” he said.

When the negotiator asked him to identify himself, Mateen answered, “My name is Islamic soldier,” and, “Call me Mujahideen. Call me the solider of God.” He said he’d pledged allegiance to the Islamic State and expressed admiration for one of the brothers who carried out the deadly Boston Marathon bombing in 2013.

Investigators concluded later that there was no direct link between ISIS and the assault on Pulse, a gay nightclub.


The jihadi literally spells it out for them:

The attack occurred during the holy month of Ramadan. Mateen told the negotiator that he was adhering to religious tradition.

So…despite the fact that he openly declared his motives and allegiance, that’s not what it was at all. There was no connection to ISIS. Nothing to see here. Move along.

But when a white man walks into a mosque and slaughters 50 muslims, his motives are immediately known, interpreted, and extrapolated onto a larger community.

Huffpo has thrown all caution out the window for the Christchurch, NZ terror attack.

Huffpo headline: “The New Zealand Shooter’s Rhetoric Sounds Like Something You Might Hear In Congress”

That’s pretty rich considering the intolerance coming from Congress has all been radical Muslims attacking Jews. But apparently it’s Republican rhetoric that’s in need of examination according to HuffPo.

Huffpo headline: “Mass Shooters Have Exploited The Internet For Years. New Zealand Took It To A New Level.”

Omar Mateen didn’t take Jihad’s hate-filled, angry ideology and make it viral?

This is just Huffington Post. You can do this comparison and receive similar results at almost any news organization in the country.

And when a Muslim slaughters innocent people, the community is immediately warned not to incite a backlash.

Huffpo headline: “Orlando Muslims Grapple With Backlash Tied To Pulse Nightclub Gunman”

Huffpo headline: “US Muslim groups condemn Orlando nightclub shooting amid fears of backlash”

In the case of the Christchurch terror attack, there are no warnings of caution against a backlash. On the contrary, the media and institutional left seem hell bent on fostering one.

Also, after a muslim commits an act of terror on American soil, like the one on 9/11, Americans are immediately warned that to sacrifice any freedom for security is a betrayal of the American dream.

Here’s the ACLU on not sacrificing freedom when a Muslim slaughters innocent people:

America faces a crucial test. That test is whether we – the political descendents of Jefferson and Madison, and citizens of the world’s oldest democracy – have the confidence, ingenuity and commitment to secure our safety without sacrificing our liberty.


Anonymous said...

Today, the left is demanding the shuttering of any chat board the Christchurch terrorist might’ve hung out. They don’t even want to debate freedom vs security. They just want to punish everyone who might identify with a community this terrorist identified with.

If anyone demanded the closing of a mosque frequented by the Boston Marathon bombers, or Omar Mateen, there’d be hell to pay from the ACLU.

Why are atrocities committed by a Muslim given the narrowest, velvet glove treatment while terrorism committed by a white guy is instantly interpreted against a wider community?
Comments from TheGatewayPundit tell us more

Reader commends on all this from TGP:

Citizen 1949: Isn’t it odd how the mass murders by mooslems go on around the world and barely a peep is heard in national media, but let one mosque shooting happen by a non-muslim and the media goes nuts.

Notmybrotherskeeper2: If only the Left were so outraged by the 4500 Christians murdered last year, by Muslims.
But then again, Christians being marked for genocide makes “progressives” feel less miserable than usual.

Whitehorse: In February of this year alone, 22 countries suffered through islamic terror attacks. There were a total of 150 attacks with 883 killed and 547 injured. Similar statistics occur every damn month. Most people are unaware of this staggering reality, or else their minds are incapable of rational thought and they can’t process what this entails.

Pepper Michaels: I REFUSE to watch and listen any “news” reports of the shootings anymore – and I have been. Meanwhile, mooslem affairs and atrocities are being committed monthly in places as the African continent, but yet the JOURNALISM sprinkles it lightly on page 15 of world news daily . Mooslem insertions into host nations is very delicate and upon insertion and attachment, host nation Governments become very, very, very afraid – see Nancy Pelosi blinking over Omar.

DZ-015: Huffpo masthead motto: If we didn’t have double standards, we’d have no standards at all.

Stephen Decatur: The Leftist propoganda machine is on full display every day for anyone who cares to see it. However, 2A is going to make the US a different challenge than the Islamists have encountered recently.

Michael in Dublin: “Today, the left is demanding the shuttering of any chat board the Christchurch terrorist might’ve hung out.” Great suggestion: shut down Google, Facebook, Twitter, Youtube and Apple devices so that all brutal people and terrorists can have no free publicity. This will prevent the spreading of hatred. The killer loved China but did not realize that if he had done this in China no one would have heard of this.

Stay up to date on more news about shootings (and how they’re covered in the media) by reading:

RayB said...


I have no idea as to why "Unknown" attributed to me the quotation in the 9:00 PM post. I did not write anything of the sort. Clearly, it was an attempt to make it seem that I wrote that post, which I did not.


RayB said...

To Anon @ 5:11 PM

Of course, but if they are born again believers, they need to "come out from among them and be ye separate" as stated very well in Paul's post @ 5:10 PM.

paul said...

Jesus said that he is the bread of life, it's true , and that can be the explanation for the statement that we must eat his flesh and drink his blood, which is so controversial.
But He also said that he is the Word of God.
It's occurs to me that the act of eating and drinking should LITERALLY include listening, watching, and reading. We ingest things not only through our mouths, but through our eyes and ears. We eat up the words of the book, like John in Revelations 10. We drink in the words of the preacher. We literally ingest these things; take them in and digest them; like songs and movies and they become a part of us.
It's literal, not figurative eating, and drinking.

Anonymous said...

Maybe you want to speak something to this?
I am just throwing this out there, but I have wondered if born of water and of spirit is a reference to the water of the Word (Jesus is the Word--the Logos--the word of God called Living Water because God's Word is living and active Heb 4:12) and of The Spirit of God which, of course, begat Him in Mary's womb (no human father needed).
But I have also wondered if maybe a reference to physical birth and then a spiritual birth because in our physical birth we are ushered out of the womb in water, quite literally, a mother's water breaks, and the baby is born and spiritual birth is the work of the Holy Spirit.
Just thoughts but wonder if anyone else thinks along these lines..

And I definitely agree with Paul's post @ 8:40 AM.

Craig said...

paul @ 8:40AM,

I’d say you’re mixing metaphors and mixing contexts. One can watch, listen, and read (subtitles, e.g.) in watching TV, but we wouldn’t think that means s/he literally ate or drank the TV. When we speak of eating or drinking in a literal sense, we are speaking about food and beverage (or, e.g., in vampire lore, drinking blood in literal sense). Eating or drinking anything else is figurative. In the Bread of Life discourse Jesus was telling the audience to eat His flesh and drink His blood. This is not to be interpreted in a literal, cannibalistic sense. It must be figurative, metaphorical language.

I might devour lunch or I might devour a book. But the first is speaking about literally eating food, while the latter is speaking in a figurative manner.

Anon 11:18AM,

Here’s the Greek in that verse:
gennēthȩ̄ ex hydatos kai pneumatos
Born of/from water and spirit.

There is only one “of”, which means ‘water and spirit’ are one conceptual unit: of water-and-spirit. Contrary to some English translations it doesn’t convey “of water and of [the] S/spirit”. “Born spiritually” or “born of the Spirit” are good understandings.

The “living water” is not Jesus Himself but the Spirit (see John 7:37-39). In John 4:13 Jesus tells the Samaritan woman about the water He will give. So, ‘water-and-spirit’ could be alluding to this, sure.

By the context I don’t see any allusion to our first birth or any birth in a physical sense. This, of course, was Nicodemus’ issue: He interpreted Jesus “born again/from above” as meaning a second birth through a mother’s womb. So, from my perspective, I don’t see any allusion to a comparison between our physical birth and our spiritual birth.

paul said...

Brother Craig,
I didn't say anything about cannibalism.
I'm saying that to devour a book is to eat it, literally. For the last three nights I've been chewing on the Book of Jubilees. I finished it last night and I'm full. I'm glad I finished it because I really can't eat any more and I'd hate to waste any of it.
Like John the Revelator, when I eat up the "little book" of Revelations, it's sweet in my mouth but it can make the belly kind of bitter.
The truth does that sometimes.
It's a more comprehensive definition of the word to eat. Don't the words go into your eyes and get processed by your soul?
Why must food going in your mouth be the only kind of eating that's considered literal ?
My mouth is in my head, but so are my eyes and my ears, and for that matter my nose. They are all four of them organs of intake. They all four feed my soul. What's so hard to understand?
The Bible is the Word of God.
Jesus is the Word of God. Both those things are true.
When I read the Bible, I'm breaking bread with Jesus, and communing with him; or taking communion. When we read the Word in a group, like a prayer group or in church, we have Communion with Him.
I read Jesus saying; "Take this, all of you, and eat. This is my body which is given up for you. Do this in remembrance of me."
Didn't Jesus say, " My bread is to do the will of my Father." ?
Don't we live in a time of famine? It is a time in which, it seems almost no one reads the Holy Scriptures, and that includes so-called Christians.
It is a true famine. It is literal.

Anonymous said...

Thank you, Paul.

Being a hearer of the Word then becoming a doer of it is to become a partaker of Christ.
eat or drink (something).
"she had partaken of a cheese sandwich and a cup of coffee"
synonyms: consume, have, eat, drink, take, devour, polish off, ingest; More
join in (an activity).
"visitors can partake in golfing or clay pigeon shooting"
synonyms: participate in, take part in, engage in, enter into, join in, get involved in, share in, play a part in, contribute to, have a hand in, have something to do with
"video conferencing allows executives to partake in negotiations abroad"

"I delight to do Thy will, O Lord" was the very heart and mind of Christ. Real, actual, literal. Spiritual, eternal work with application in the literal.
By faith we partake of Christ...

paul said...

Literally literal

Craig said...

I regret partaking in this discussion. (literal)

I’m blown away at how “literal” and “figurative” are being confused. (“blown away” = figurative [I’m still here!]; the rest of the sentence is literal)

I’m quite taken aback. (figurative expression for surprised, as I’m in the same position typing as when I started)

paul, you wrote:

I'm saying that to devour a book is to eat it, literally. For the last three nights I've been chewing on the Book of Jubilees. I finished it last night and I'm full. I'm glad I finished it because I really can't eat any more and I'd hate to waste any of it.

While “devour” and “eat” have an overlapping semantic range, the two are distinct in some ways. We can devour a meal or devour a book, but in a literal sense we eat the meal and we read the book. To say we “eat” a book is a bit odd. We could say we ‘ate it up’, but that’s yet another figurative use. Taking the words above, I construe that the Book of Jubilees went into your stomach (that’s one way of getting your fiber, I suppose), which means you can no longer read that particular version, for it’s working its way through your digestive tract. Sure, in the context of our conversation, I get what you’re getting at, but it’s a rather strained mixing of metaphors and figures of speech. Sorry if that sounds a bit harsh, but I’m not sure how else to phrase it. Figuratively, to ‘chew on’ a written work is to think intently on its contents. As for literal usage, my cat chewed on a corner of one of my books, to my consternation.

We’re going to have to agree to disagree, I think. One can speak about literal things using figurative language, and this is what Communion is about. We don’t literally eat Jesus by doing His instructions of ‘take this bread, this is My body’. We usually eat a cracker that represents the bread that signifies remembering Jesus’ sacrifice. That is, unless you’re now agreeing with the doctrine of the ‘real presence’.

Unfortunately, it’s becoming more common to conflate “literally” and “figuratively” (though I’ve yet to see anyone use the word “figuratively” and mean “literally”). This issue is mentioned here:

Here is their first example of correct usage:

”Very young children eat their books, literally devouring their contents. This is one reason for the scarcity of first editions of Alice in Wonderland and other favorites of the nursery."

The first sentence is similar to what you are stating. Obviously this complete statement above is hyperbolic and meant to be humorous, but my point is that it illustrates that to ‘eat a book’ is considered a literal expression in the sense of putting it in one’s mouth, chewing, and swallowing.

Anonymous said...

"Sure, in the context of our conversation, I get what you’re getting at.."
Yeah, context.

"One can speak about literal things using figurative language, and this is what Communion is about"
"We don’t literally eat Jesus by doing His instructions of ‘take this bread, this is My body’. We usually eat a cracker that represents the bread that signifies remembering Jesus’ sacrifice."

Partaking in this conversation I "see" (with my understanding) that the context (of Jesus' words) literally highlight the figurative representation of what is actually, literally, spiritually true.

paul said...

Brother Craig,
The difficulty comes when Jesus says; "My flesh is food indeed and my blood is drink indeed". That's when so many actually fell away and left him. (But then he knew that they would).
I'm saying that the definition of "to eat" actually included that which we intake with our eyes and ears as well as what we intake with our mouths. It's not just figurative language. It's about the definition of the word and how broad it is.
And why shouldn't it be? I may sound a bit odd to our ears that someone should eat up a book but that's what the angel told John to do in Rev.10. And that's what John says he did.
Did Jesus really only intend that we should eat a cracker occasionally in his name? How about read the Bible every day in his name?
Breaking bread can be a nice symbol of it, (fellowship is a beautiful thing), but I think there's more to it. When you're looking at his words on a page aren't you taking Him into your soul?
No I'm not into the whole transubstantiation thing. That's the RCC for you: they forbade the personal reading of the Bible under the pretense that only the "priests" should be allowed to interpret it. They confiscated Bibles and persecuted those who insisted on reading it for themselves. There was the beginning of a famine.

Craig said...

Anon 10:22PM,

And your point in statement is what exactly?

Anonymous said...

The Mystery Of The Eucharist

Bartholomew F. Brewer, Ph.D.

Of all the ancient dogmas of the Roman Catholic religion, the dogma of the very heart of Romanism and the key to the so-called "sacrifice of the mass."

Transubstantiation is Rome's most lucrative, powerful and fixed dogma. Certainly it is her most effective control device for the perpetuation of her gigantic corporation whose existence is maintained by sacraments administered by a supposedly divinely empowered priesthood.


The doctrine of transubstantiation does not date back to the Last Supper as is supposed. It was a controverted topic for many centuries before officially becoming an article of faith, which means that it is essential to salvation according to the Roman Catholic Church. The idea of a corporal presence was vaguely held by some, such as Ambrose, but it was not until 831 A.D. that Paschasius Radbertus, a Benedictine monk, published a treatise openly advocating the doctrine of transubstantiation. Even then, for almost another four hundred years, theological war was waged over this teaching by bishops and people alike until at the Fourth Lateran Council in 1215 A.D., it was officially defined and canonized as a dogma.

Like many of the beliefs and rites of Romanism, transubstantiation was first practiced by pagan religions. The noted historian Durant said that belief in transubstantiation as practiced by the priests of the Roman Catholic system is "one of the oldest ceremonies of primitive religion." The Story Of Civilization, p. 741. The syncretism and mysticism of the Middle East were great factors in influencing the West, particularly Italy. Roman Society From Nero To Marcus Aurelius, Dill. In Egypt priests would consecrate meat cakes which were supposed to be come the flesh of Osiris. Encyclopedia Of Religions, Vol. 2, p. 76.

The idea of transubstantiation was also characteristic of the religion of Mithra whose sacraments of cakes and Haoma drink closely parallel the Catholic Eucharistic rite. Ibid. The idea of eating the flesh of deity was most popular among the people of Mexico and Central America long before they ever heard of Christ; and when Spanish missionaries first landed in those countries "their surprise was heightened, when they witnessed a religious rite which reminded them of image made of flour...and after consecration by priests, was distributed among the people who ate it...declaring it was the flesh of deity..." Prescott's Mexico, Vol. 3.

Anonymous said...

The Christian Church for the first three hundred years remained somewhat pure and faithful to the Word of God, but after the pseudo-conversion of Constantine, who for political expedience declared Christianity the state religion, thousands of pagans were admitted to the church by baptism alone without true conversion. They brought with them pagan rites which they boldly introduced into the church with Christian terminology, thus corrupting the primitive faith. Even the noted Catholic prelate and theologian, Cardinal Newman, tells us that Constantine introduced many things of pagan origin: "We are told in various ways by Eusebius, that Constantine, in order to recommend the new religion to the heathen, transferred into it the outward ornaments to which they had been accustomed in their own...The use of temples, and these dedicated to particular saints, and ornamented on occasions with branches of trees; incense, lamps, and candles; votive offerings on recovery from illness; holy water; asylums; holydays and seasons, use of calendars, processions, blessings on fields, sacerdotal vestments, the tonsure, the ring in marriage, turning to the East, images at a later date, perhaps the ecclesiastical chant, and the Kyrie Eleison, are all of pagan origin, and sanctified by their adoption into the Church." An Essay On The Development Of Christian Doctrine, pp. 359, 360. This unholy alliance also allowed the continuance of the pagan custom of eating and drinking the literal flesh and literal blood of their god. This is actually how transubstantiation entered the professing church.


True born again Christians who correctly interpret the Word of God see without any difficulty whatsoever that our Lord's reference to His body and blood was symbolic. When Jesus spoke of Himself as being the bread, He was not teaching the fictitious transubstantiation of the Papal church. It is preposterous to hold that the Son of God turned a piece of bread into Himself. When Jesus said "this is my body" or "blood," He did not change the substance, but was explaining that He is the one "represented" by the passover bread and wine. Jesus did not say touto gignetai, this has become or is turned into, but touto esti, which can only mean this represents or stands for. It is perfectly clear in the Gospels that Christ spoke in FIGURATIVE terms.

Anonymous said...

"And your point in statement is what exactly?"

There is no stumble in the words.
The context (of Jesus' words) takes care of what we can literally (verbatim) know of symbolic (figurative) things.
And we don't need to overthink or overstate it either.

Anonymous said...


Anonymous said...

"True born again Christians who correctly interpret the Word of God see without any difficulty whatsoever that our Lord's reference to His body and blood was symbolic."
"It is perfectly clear in the Gospels that Christ spoke in FIGURATIVE terms."

Thanks 10:38 PM (from 10:50 PM).

Craig said...

Anon 10:22, 10:50PM (and 11:02),

With the confusing and conflating of "literally" and "figuratively"--not to mention the fact that I'm tired--I didn't wish to misinterpret your statement.

Anonymous said...

10:50 PM

But if some person here doesn't get to overthink, or overstate, then they will no longer enjoy that great head rush, when their head becomes the size of a bean bag chair!

Anonymous said...

Is fine, Craig. Always appreciate your input.
I think that literal and figurative are not meant for comparison sake in what we are speaking to this evening, but rather for broadening (as Paul said) the understanding that Jesus' literally spoken spiritual words, defined in figurative terms, are to be taken (taken in to ourselves by faith) as truth (and lived accordingly).

I seek everyday "to be well fed in these days of famine"...and by God's grace, I am.
I wish for everyone else to be well fed too, but a choice they have to make for themselves.

Anonymous said...

John 6:66 From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him.

How interesting that John Chapter 6, verse 66, is a display of the anti-christ spirit.

The Bible says the just (those justified by believing the Lord's atoning work of salvation-I am the way, the truth, and the life Jesus said) shall live by faith.....

Anonymous said...

In reality Craig, you can often be a bit pompous.

Anonymous said...


Anonymous said...

Marianne Williamson: If I Am President, I Will Take Control of Your Children and Make Them New Agers

Course in Miracles promoter, Marianne Williamson, who is running in the 2020 presidential election, has big plans for the children of this country if she is elected. Among other things, part of those plans is to make sure children in American public schools are trained in mindfulness meditation. While tens of thousands of public schools in the U.S. are already teaching children mindfulness meditation, no doubt, with a New Age president, every school would be including it.

'As president, I would advocate for the following: Mindfulness training in the schools.' —Marianne Williamson, 2019 (source)

Williamson also promises to advocate for “universal pre-K.” This would help make sure that children as young as 3 and 4 would be placed into the public school system. Advocates of universal pre-K believe they need more time with America’s children and want to get their hands on them much earlier than 5 or 6 (Kindergarten).

Parents beware. If Marianne Williamson (or another candidate with her “values,”) becomes president, this country’s children will be at even greater risk than they are now. And you can be sure, she will not be advocating for homeschooling families.

Anonymous said...

Pediatricians Now Covertly Interrogating Children To Find Out If Their Parents Own Guns

Constance Cumbey said...

I think some readers here (RayB? others) did not get the central point of this point -- it can be gleaned by reading some of my earlier posts that I cross-referenced. It can also be gleaned by reading an important book, THE DICTATOR POPE, that recounts "the Mafia" that Cardinal Danneels proudly claimed to be part of -- the one anxious to get rid of Pope Benedict XVI (Ratzinger) and bring in Bergoglio. Cardinal Ratzinger, although originally sought to be a theological liberal, did in his capacity of head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith open a file on Matthew Fox, then a Dominican Priest pushing the doctrines of "Cosmic Christ." He then took strong stands against the New Age Movement and was in many circles credited with turning Pope John Paul II in that direction. Before this, the New Agers bragged that they had John Paul II literally in their pocket and "he would bow his knees." After that, Benjamin Creme wrote disgustedly in one of his books that it would not happen (Maitreya's reign) as long as John Paul II was Pope. Danneels hoped in the election for Pope after JPII's death to bring in Bergoglio and was so disgusted that Ratzinger was elected that he did not attend the dinner Ratzinger/Benedict XVI had for the Cardinals upon his election. I am searching in my library for that specific portion of one of Creme's books -- I read it before I closed my
Bloomfield Hills law office and moved my work and books from there home, so be patient with me. I'm looking!


Constance Cumbey said...

One of the Creme books suggesting it would not happen while JPII was there -- but this is not the one I am still looking for, but this 1997 book also suggests strong Vatican opposition -- this was 4 years after Pope John Paul II gave his first major statement against New Age Movement that was in 1993. I'll post more when I find it:


Anonymous said...

Craig wrote:

'Obviously this complete statement above is hyperbolic' ...

Be careful in telling Paul that, he may take it as a euphemism.

Anonymous said...

@Anon 2:00 AM,

He's more puffed up than Paul, just somewhat more knowledgeable and a lot less caustic.

Anonymous said...

@Anon 2:00 AM,

To be fair, Craig's no more puffed up than Paul, just somewhat more knowledgeable and a lot less caustic.

Anonymous said...


Just because you are emphatically superfluous, doesn't mean you are changing wine into water. That which is figurative doesn't become literal because of it being an experience not just like, but so very much like so very much LIKE the literal experience of eating as THOUGH you were actually doing so.

As shown all too often in your earlier posts, you do swallow a camel and yet strain at a gnat.

RayB said...

Dear Constance,

Again, respectfully, I think you are missing the "point." JPII & Benedict XVI both promoted the New Age concept of a One World Religion, along with, I might add, an economic New World Order to be headed by a global centralized government.

You cite Ratzinger/Benedict XVI as one who "took strong stands against the New Age Movement." Is that really true, or is it something that you just choose to believe, in spite of the facts? Consider this; as Pope, Benedict XVI was an admirer of and promoted the "father of the New Age Movement," none other than the Jesuit philosopher Pierre Teilhard de Chardin. For example, it was Benedict XVI who praised de Chardin's NAM theory of the "entire cosmos being a living host" (i.e. Eucharist). See the 2009 National Catholic Reporter's article on this here:

In an important, but perhaps, seemingly unrelated point regarding then Cardinal Ratzinger's position as head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. Serving in that capacity for over 10 years, virtually every single child sex abuse case file in the entire world (in which there existed documentation) was overseen by Ratzinger. Delivered via sealed "Diplomatic Couriers," this information entailed sordid details regarding "pay for silence," "transfers of offending Priests," "out of court settlements," persistent refusals by church leaders to cooperate with law enforcement officials, along with what amounted to as a vast conspiracy to obstruct justice. What exactly did Ratzinger do to stop the abuses? He simply carried on with the Vatican policy of "business as usual," all of which, and much more, continues to be exposed to the light of day.

The fact that Creme made an obscure statement regarding JPII is rather irrelevant when compared to the real record of the pro NAM actions of both JP II & Ratzinger. PF has built upon the foundation of their work and taken it all to a new level.


Anonymous said...

...And so Paul's 'lover' emerges once again from the shadows...

Anonymous said...

NOT RayB(!)

Nice timing RayB!

Anonymous said...

Craig and paul both are great benefits to this blog and I appreciate them both.
9:19 and 9:23 AM benefits nobody by those, and prior posts...least of all themself, for there is no grace in those words.

Frankly, is that response really necessary?

RayB said...

Are there "regenerative powers" to be gained by "eating dirt?"

Ask Beto O'Rourke:

I once heard Michael Savage declare that "Liberalism is a mental disorder." Who can rationally argue with that statement?

Anonymous said...

Pope declined French cardinal's resignation after sex abuse cover-up conviction

Anonymous said...

Can paedophilia stage a comeback?

Anonymous said...

RayB 10:49 AM

You are appreciated as a defender of truth here!

You have to understand that Constance practices the art of sophistry. Perhaps that is the reason for her love of Susanna, who also practices twisting reality. Also, Constance's grandma wanted her to be nice to Catholics, and she has gone too far with that. Perhaps most of us so called Christians have a greater love for their family, friends, wealth + fame than they do for Christ, and his truth?

Anonymous said...

Grant & Co.,

Have a nice day...

New Zealand gun owners begin voluntarily surrendering their weapons to authorities

College Leftists now claim the New Zealand attack means NOBODY can ever criticize Muslims ever again

What are they trying to hide? Out of all the violent videos on the ‘net, possessing the NZ mosque shooting video can now get you 10 years in prison

03/17/2019 / By Mike Adams

Something is incredibly fishy about the New Zealand mosque shooting and how governments and the media have responded to it. Governments are now going to extraordinary lengths to eliminate the video from the internet while criminalizing anyone who dares possess it or distribute it.

An 18-year-old man was arrested in New Zealand for merely sharing the live stream video of the Christchurch shooting. “The live stream video of the shootings in Christchurch has been classified by the Chief Censor’s Office as objectionable,” reports Radio NZ. “Police said anyone in possession of the video of the shootings, or found to be distributing it, could face imprisonment.”

This means, essentially, that linking to content the government doesn’t like is now a crime in New Zealand.

But wait: Horrific videos of WWII death camps, assassinations and street shootings are NOT banned or criminalized…
So wait a minute. YouTube alone hosts countless murder videos covering everything from war-time military shootings to civilian gunfight videos in which people are fatally shot and killed. Yet possessing those videos — or sharing them, or posting them — apparently isn’t a crime in New Zealand or anywhere in the western world.

Assassination videos of former U.S. President John F. Kennedy being shot in the head are not censored online. They are considered part of the “historical record.” Yet wasn’t that shooting just as violent and just as hateful as the Christchurch shooting in New Zealand?

World War II documentary videos by Ken Burns and other documentary filmmakers depict horrific mass murder events including the Holocaust, yet there is no government in the world that criminalized citizens for sharing Holocaust incineration oven videos or historical footage of death camp survivors. Ever wonder why these videos are deemed “safe” to share but not the New Zealand shooting video?

Anonymous said...

Government’s response to the shooting is raising even more red flags than the shooting itself.

So what is it about this particular shooting that has governments in a total frenzy to terrorize citizens into deleting all the copies they might possess?

Could it be that the attack was, according to this one analysis, carried out by a special ops military team that also carried out the attack on the North Korean embassy in Spain, as reported by Disobedient Media? As Disobedient Media says:

An investigation and analysis by Disobedient Media indicates that Tarrant and the group he worked with likely have professional military connections, are part of the same cell that perpetrated a February 22nd break-in of the North Korean embassy in Spain and potentially have intelligence ties to various agencies that cooperate under the UKUSA Agreement popularly known as Five Eyes (FVEY).

The [shooter] also engaged in extensive travel abroad to a number of areas that should have raised red flags with intelligence services. Countries visited by Tarrant included Pakistan, North Korea, Turkey, parts of Africa, Portugal, Spain, France, Afghanistan and Xinjiang, China. The extensive travel and access to military grade firearms should have made detection by law enforcement and intelligence services nearly impossible to avoid.

Funny, I don’t recall the mainstream media reporting that this guy had traveled all over the world while somehow collecting military-grade firearms and stockpiling them in New Zealand. You’re not supposed to even know that part of the story.

Could it be that there was also a third shooting venue reported outside the Christchurch Hospital, indicating that a much larger assault team had been deployed in military fashion to launch simultaneous attacks on three targets? (Two mosques and one hospital.) As Maori News previously reported:

There is also a report of a gunman at a second Christchurch mosque in Linwood. And a third active shooting is being reported outside Christchurch Hospital… Stuff is reporting shots being fired at Christchurch hospital.

Could it be that the police response to the shooting was suspiciously slow, taking over 20 minutes for police to arrive even though police stations were only a few blocks away? (Sounds a bit like the Parkland shooting in Florida, doesn’t it? Remember how sheriff’s deputies were ordered to stand down while the shooting was playing out?)

Could it be that eyewitnesses described “blood everywhere” but the live-streamed shooting video doesn’t appear to show any blood at all?

Could it be that the primary shooter openly described his attack as a false flag operation designed to foment civil war in America over gun rights? As InfoWars reports, “The New Zealand shooter admitted in his manifesto that his goal was to kill Muslims with firearms to spark a civil war in the United States, and create cultural division in the West.”

Why do the AR-15 rifle cartridges disappear mid-air and never hit the ground?
Here’s another interesting question in all this: Why do the brass cartridges being ejected from the AR-15 never hit the ground? They all magically disappear mid-air. See this video on, because it’s banned everywhere else:

Anonymous said...

Every time I train with an AR-15, I always end up with brass on the ground. Sadly, I’ve never been able to buy “magic brass” that disappears mid-air and never hits the ground, because that would be really convenient at the gun range. (Those mean range masters make us clean up all our brass, for some reason.)

Somehow, this kill team in New Zealand was able to source some magic brass, which might come from the same supplier as the magic passports found on the sidewalk in New York after the 9/11 attacks.

(Authorities claimed the passports were ejected from the airplanes during the explosions, survived the fireball and fell to the ground where they were picked up by police and magically found to identify the attackers. Wow. Where can I get some of that passport material? It seems impervious to explosions…)

Something looks very suspicious about this video
Why are so many people just standing around in every room instead of hitting the ground, hiding behind cover or fleeing out the nearest exit? To be clear, we’re not in any way saying that people weren’t killed, but it’s almost certain at this point that some parts of the shooter’s own narrative are contrived, since he explains in his own manifesto that he initiated the shooting to manipulate public opinion and start a war. That underscores his media-savvy knowledge of how the world media would report on his attack, even knowing that the media would cherry pick whatever they wanted in order to blame President Trump, gun owners, white people or conservatives. His attack, honestly stated, was designed for the media and played out for the media, even by the shooter’s own admissions in his manifesto.

Anonymous said...

(Copied from NewsHub site New Zealand)

Christchurch mosque linked to al-Qaida suspect



A Christchurch mosque has been linked to the drone killing of New Zealand al-Qaida suspect Daryl Jones.

The parents of an Australian killed alongside Jones say their son was taught radical Islam in Christchurch, where he also met Mr Jones.

Christopher Havard was killed alongside Mr Jones by a US drone in Yemen last year.

His parents, Neill and Bronwyn Dowrick, say their son told them he was first taught radical Islam at the Al Noor mosque in Addington.

Mr Havard moved from Australia to New Zealand in 2010. He's remembered at the mosque by the name of Saleem Khattab.

"[He was] no different than other people," says mosque president Mohamed Jama. "He was a normal man."

Mr Havard's parents say it's at the mosque he met fellow convert Mr Jones, who was known at Muslim Bin John.

But the mosque can't remember Mr Jones, and denies teaching radical Islam.

It seems Kiwi spies may have had the mosque under surveillance.

"I'm not going to go into the individual entities or the operations that the SIS or the GCSB conducted," says Prime Minister John Key.

Australian Federal Police (AFP) began an investigation into Mr Havard's possible involvement in an alleged al-Qaida kidnapping of three westerners in Yemen.

Documents show, "Mr Havard and Mr Nin John were of long-standing interest to the AFP due to their assessed activities in Yemen liked to al-Qaida".

All that's known of Mr Jones is that he was 31 years old, a joint New Zealand-Australian citizen, and his family are still here.

RayB said...

For those that are unfamiliar with the Jesuit New Age philosopher Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, here is a sampling from his writings:

"The recognition that ‘God cannot create except evolutively’ provides a radical solution for our reason to the problem of evil (which is a direct ‘effect’ of evolution), and at the same time explains the manifest and mysterious association of matter and spirit." - Christianity and Evolution

NOTE: notice that de Chardin states that "God CANNOT CREATE" matter out of nothing, but rather, His creation must obey the theoretical (and false) scientific laws of evolution. Pope Francis recently stated, in effect, the exact same thing; "God is not a magician that can create by waving his magic wand." On several occasions, he has endorsed the "Big Bang Theory" along with Darwin's theory of Evolution. In 1950, Pope Pius XII declared that Darwin's theory of Evolution was "not at odds with Catholic teachings." Pope John Paul II in 1996 also endorsed Darwin's theory. Funny how all of these supposed "Vicars of Christ" side with an anti-Christ atheist in Darwin as opposed to the Scripture's authoritative declarations.

From his book entitled The Heart of the Matter, de Chardin writes that Christ is dependent upon the evolutionary cosmic process and is actually "saved" himself by it!

“It is Christ, in very truth, who saves—but should we not immediately add that, at the same time, it is Christ who is saved by Evolution?”

From de Chardin's book The Divine Milieu, he laments his previous lack of understanding and states ".. I failed to understand that as God “metamorphized” the World from the depths of matter to the peaks of Spirit, so in addition the World must inevitably and to the same degree “endomorphize” God…. All around us, and within our own selves, God is in the process of “changing” as a result of the coincidence of his magnetic power and our own Thought."

NOTE: in direct contrast to de Chardin's heretical nonsense, the CREATOR, "Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever." Hebrews 13:8

This is the very same Jesuit New Age philosopher that Pope Benedict XVI promoted and praised! Anti New Age warrior? You decide.

paul said...

Now the footage has been removed as well.

Anonymous said...

ALERT: Video Platform Under Extreme Threat From Internet Infrastructure Providers, Forced To Delete All New Zealand Shooting Videos, Essentially “At Gunpoint” By The Globalist Controllers Of The ‘Net!!!

(Natural News) This is an emergency alert concerning, the free speech video platform alternative to YouTube.

I’m writing this at 12:45 am, March 21st. The Brighteon platform is now under extreme threat by upstream infrastructure providers over users posting footage of the New Zealand Christchurch shooting. We are being threatened to remove all the videos or face complete annihilation online, starting with being de-platformed from infrastructure providers, followed by legal action from none other than the nation of Australia (not even New Zealand itself, but Australia and it’s “Office of the eSafety Commissioner.”)

We anticipated this exact scenario many months ago, and we have been feverishly building alternative internal infrastructure to eliminate any dependencies on upstream infrastructure providers, to the extent that such a configuration is possible. However, we are still several months away from completion of that build out phase. Sadly, over the next few hours we are being forced — essential “at gunpoint” (the irony being completely lost of the fascists who now control the ‘net) — to delete all videos containing footage of the New Zealand shooting.

If we refuse to take this action, then ALL the videos on Brighteon will essentially be de-platformed, and none of them will be viewable by the public. The entire website will be annihilated.

Make no mistake: We are facing extreme online fascism, censorship and authoritarian speech police who are exploiting the New Zealand operation to roll out a totalitarian police state across the ‘net. The excuse we are being given is that hosting or sharing the videos is “promoting violence” — an absurd claim on its face. If videos that depict violence are so harmful to the public, then why did the entire mainstream media play the 9/11 twin towers attack videos a million times over, burning the imagery into the minds of the American people? In that attack, over 3,500 Americans died, yet no one claimed that showing the video was promoting violence.

If violent action sequences are “promoting violence,” then why isn’t every Hollywood action movie banned? Why aren’t the million other violent YouTube videos banned? Why is it perfectly acceptable to show video footage of Adolf Hitler’s Third Reich torturing and killing Jews in concentration camps? Have we really reached the point where videos that show Jews being mass murdered are perfectly okay, but videos that show followers of Islam being murdered are criminalized? I thought all genocide was evil, and burying it through censorship is not going to make the hatred go away. If we are to recognize the source of these conflicts and acts of violence, we must be willing to see what actually took place. But today, even viewing certain particular videos is now essentially considered a multi-national crime.

Anonymous said...

Somehow, this New Zealand shooting video — in which rifle brass disappears mid-air, by the way, like magical ammo — is being invoked to justify the ultimate free speech crackdown across the ‘net. Anyone who dares examine the forensic video evidence, ask intelligent questions about the shooting or question the official narrative is now being threatened with internet-wide de-platforming and possible legal action.

We have reached the state of “total censorship” on the ‘net. This is the beginning of the end of humanity, since no voices, views or opinions that contradict “official narratives” are going to be allowed anywhere online.

As InfoWars also covered earlier today, the next escalation of censorship will involve banning URLs from browsers, meaning Chrome, FireFox, etc. will not even allow you type in “” or “” or any other site the globalist controllers don’t want you to see. They will use another false flag shooting as justification to ban any URL they want, always in the name of “public safety.”

In truth, globalists believe that anyone who thinks for themselves is a threat to public safety. Therefore, all non-conformists, dissenters, independent thinkers or outspoken voices of truth must be systematically silenced by all the tech giants, including: Google, Apple, Twitter, Amazon, YouTube, Snapchat, Pinterest and others. Together, they now operate a global cabal — an online mafia — that demands absolute obedience to irrational demands.

Sadly, unless either the Trump administration or We the People rise up and overthrow these techno-fascist monstrosities, humanity is now enslaved under absolute online tyranny. No independent thought is allowed from this day forward.

In terms of practical actions, we have been building an “underground” information hub for many months — a new solution that will make content available to human eyes but invisible to all search engines and computer algorithms. Sadly, human truth is going to have to move to “underground” status to evade de-platforming efforts by totalitarian fascists.

I will record a strong video follow-up message in the coming days and post it on Brighteon, unless the internet tyrants annihilate it first. We are working hard to protect free speech, but the globalists are now holding loaded guns at our head and saying they will pull the trigger if we do not comply. For the moment, we are forced to comply in order to save all the other videos on the platform. However, in the long run, we have no intention whatsoever to comply with tyranny and authoritarianism.

– Mike Adams

Anonymous said...

New Zealand follows COMMUNIST CHINA in erecting “great firewall” of internet content to block all independent journalism about the Mosque shooting

Thursday, March 21, 2019 by: JD Heyes

(Natural News) The damage that one maniac’s horrific act of terror is doing to New Zealand’s democratic processes will be irreversible — that is, without major societal upheaval at some point in the future.

When Brenton Tarrant live-streamed the murders of worshipers in two Christchurch mosques a week ago, he not only stole the life from innocent human beings, he stole the lifeblood of New Zealand’s peaceful, tranquil freedoms.

In the aftermath, Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern immediately called for new gun control laws that would ban the kind of semi-automatic rifle used by Tarrant, even though the country doesn’t have a huge problem with firearms of the type — or with gun crimes in general.

Now, after several Western websites broadcast footage of Tarrant’s livestream, allowed it to be shown on their sites, or permitted it to be freely discussed (on sites like Dissenter and Zero Hedge), not only did New Zealand telecoms ban them, but now the same firms want more censorship from big tech platforms — to “protect consumers.”

That censorship has already begun. Facebook, which was Tarrant’s chosen live-stream platform, took the video down and then proceeded to delete some 1.5 million additional videos of the assault; 1.2 million of those were blocked at the time of upload.

Update from Mia Garlick, Facebook New Zealand:

"We continue to work around the clock to remove violating content using a combination of technology and people...

"In the first 24 hours we removed 1.5 million videos of the attack globally, of which over 1.2 million were blocked at upload..."

The social media giant also said it had been in contact with the other big tech behemoths including Google, Twitter, and Microsoft via the “Global Internet Forum to Counter Terrorism (GIFCT).

"Out of respect for the people affected by this tragedy and the concerns of local authorities, we're also removing all edited versions of the video that do not show graphic content." — Mia Garlick, Facebook New Zealand

"We’ve been in close contact with @Google, @Twitter, and @Microsoft since last week’s terrorist attack in New Zealand through the Global Internet Forum to Counter Terrorism (GIFCT)."

Zero Hedge noted on its site that the video could still be downloaded by anyone wishing to see it from BitTorrent. 

Twitter has also been at work aggressively censoring a lot of content related to the Christchurch attack — “perhaps most egregiously forcing journalist Nick Monroe to delete a large number of tweets as he covered the incident in real time, just one of which had links to footage of the shooting,” Zero Hedge reported.

Terrorists seek to have liberties and freedom restricted — that’s the definition of terrorism

Besides merely reporting on and documenting the attack and its aftermath, Monroe has also noted the widespread censorship taking place as well. Examples include the New Zealand Herald quietly editing a March 15 story in order to remove mention of a “well known Muslim local” who “chased the shooters and fired two shots at them as they sped off” — because authorities there don’t want anyone getting the idea that guns can also be used for things like self-defense and protecting the public, and by ordinary citizens, not just armed police officers.

Anonymous said...

(Post here while you can, Grant!)

New Zealand mass shooting now being used to justify banning all chat boards, consolidating speech in the hands of the “authoritative” media giants

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...

Woman’s Religious Liberty Violated by State’s Biometric Demands - Is This Tied In With The Coming Mark Of The Beast?

Victoria is a thirty year-old New Yorker fighting for a Religious Exemption so she is not forced to be photographed on her driver’s license. She believes any photograph, especially biometric, is diametrically opposed to her Biblical religious convictions and breaks the second commandment.

Months ago, Victoria was given a NY Religious Affirmation form (DMV 1520). She was told this form would allow a driver’s license without a picture. Victoria completed the paperwork, but it was rejected without explanation and told to contact the Albany, NY DMV legal staff. She did. No response.

She asked NY State Senator, James Seward for assistance. He was told the Religious Affirmation document, the form had been voided and New York’s religious exemption program was ended.

Victoria’s Rabbi spoke to a DMV high legal authority who explicitly stated that Victoria’s hopes for a religious exemption were fruitless because the biometric photograph on the driver’s license “ties into the banking system and YOU WON'T BE ABLE TO BUY AND SELL WITHOUT IT.”

Anonymous said...

The New World Order Wants...

Early Rain Covenant Church Members Vanish

Anonymous said...

New Zealand Workers Fired Just For Watching Shooting Video Or Sharing It With Workmates

Chris Menahan

New Zealand workers are being fired from their jobs -- without any legal precedent -- just for viewing the Christchurch shooting video or sharing it with their workmates. 

From the NZ Herald:

Kiwi workers have been fired for watching the Christchurch shooter's livestream at work and sharing it with colleagues.

That's according to Cyber Research, which monitors internal computer use for around 50 companies - which include some of our biggest corporates.

[...]Founder Steve Byrne says many companies had three to five employees who'd looked up the video at work.

[...]Byrne says at least one person has been fired for watching the video while other employees were around - while others have been let go for sharing it with workmates.

Your corporate overlords spy on your web browsing then rat on you to your boss who fires you for watching/sharing video of one of the biggest news events in years.

Will ISPs be forced to rat on all their users next?

The video of September 11th was broadcast 24/7 for weeks straight because our rulers wanted to start wars in the Middle East (which killed over a million Muslims) but video of this massacre (which killed 50 Muslims) is being purged from the internet entirely, websites are being blocked, free speech is being thrown out the window and people are being jailed and fired just for glancing at it.

[Employment lawyer Jennifer Mills] thinks a dismissal for watching the Christchurch clip could probably be overturned by the Employment Relations Authority, but she adds "It's a particularly grey area. There's no precedent."

[...]Chief Censor David Shanks rated the gunman's video objectionable on Monday - meaning it is banned and those who share it face a fine of up to $10,000 or up to 14 years jail.

[...]Privacy Commissioner John Edwards has called on Facebook to hand names of those who shared the video to NZ police.

How many thousands of innocent people are they planning on throwing in jail for this?

How many hundreds of websites are they planning on banning in perpetuity? 

These governments are setting the precedent to roll out this authoritarian censorship regime in any situation they so desire in the future and they're doing it in the name of "liberal tolerance."

Anonymous said...

Patriots Unplug From Big Brother In Search Of Free Speech!

Anonymous said...

At 2:59 PM Guns Were Legal in NZ. At 3:00 PM a Massive Gun Ban Began with Promise of Prison or Fines for Anyone Who Wouldn’t Comply

After Multiple Reports About New Zealanders Turning In Guns, Guess How Many Actually Did It?

Following reports that a flood of New Zealand gun owners have been voluntarily surrending their firearms in the wake of last Friday’s Christchurch mosque attack that left 50 dead, the numbers are in on how many Kiwis actually handed over their weapons. 

Out of an estimated 1.2 million registered guns, New Zealand police report that as of Tuesday night, 37 firearms have been surrendered nationwide, according to BuzzFeed. 

Anonymous said...

How To Identify A Globalist Criminal

21 March 2019
Brandon Smith / Alt-Market

In my work analyzing the behavior and motives of globalists I often hear people question the validity of the label. Sometimes this is done by those who are purely uneducated about the background of what I can only call an organized cabal or criminal syndicate. Sometimes it is done by dishonest people who are seeking to sow the seeds of doubt. To be clear, yes, globalists are a very real group with a very real agenda, and this agenda is not morally or rationally sound.

The argument then arises - “If globalists are a real threat, then we should identify them one by one...”

This argument is often a ruse which insinuates that if a person points out the facts surrounding a crime on the part of globalists, his position is still not valid until he names them all in succession. This is a classic Alinsky tactic; to demand that the researcher catalog every person involved in a conspiracy or present a perfect solution to the criminality which may or may not be available, otherwise they should shut up and stop talking about the problem. The intent is to get us caught up in the weeds debating the extent of who is involved or whether one solution is superior to another.

Acknowledging that a specific agenda exists is the first step before anything else can be accomplished.

Obviously, one cannot outline a long list of globalist names in every essay or article. This would make each article dozens of pages long and is counterproductive. Naming names might be helpful in some circumstances, as I have done in the past such as in my article 'Globalist Disinformation Spotlight On – Mohamed El-Erian'. I welcome readers to examine that article because El-Erian is a good example of what a globalist is and the kind of ideology they espouse. It is my feeling though that it is more important to focus on the behaviors, rhetoric, institutional affiliations and beliefs of globalists, because these elitists often hide in plain sight.

Not all of them publicly call themselves “globalists”; some of them do. However, they ALL have the same character traits and they all support the same agendas.

Anonymous said...

First and foremost I suppose I should address the so called “elephant in the room”; it is important to note that there is a concerted disinformation effort by a small group of people lurking in the corners of the liberty movement to push the notion that globalism is a purely “Jewish conspiracy”. And, as our social and economic structures grow more unstable, people look for easy answers and the idea is starting to gain some traction. Their claim? It's all about the Jews, all the globalists are Jewish or somehow secretly related to Jews or are married to Jewish partners, etc. This is simply false, so let's get this out of the way...

The Jewish conspiracy narrative, I believe, is 4th generation warfare, a psychological operation, an attempt to mislead liberty movement activists away from a much deeper and darker issue. It also may be an attempt to attach the movement to white supremacy or white identity groups as if they are interchangeable. Frankly, I do not care what other people believe as long as they keep to themselves and leave others alone. If someone takes special pride in their pigmentation or culture, great, I wish them the best of luck. It is true that some cultures function better than others, but this has far more to do with the superior cultures being more free.

Just because we have a distaste for the race baiting insanity and hatred of white people or western culture displayed by the social justice left, this does not mean we need to swing to the other extreme and become zealots ourselves. I actually think the ability to discriminate at times is highly useful, but such simplistic divisions based on bias and broad generalizations make us weak, not strong. It makes us easy to conquer, not a formidable opponent to the globalists.

Here are the facts:

The vast majority of globalists are not of Jewish origin and are not zionist in their political affiliations. While there are sectors of globalist institutions that have more Jewish people than others (such as the Federal Reserve), this does not indicate a majority or any sort of broad “Jewish conspiracy”. On the contrary, the directorial boards and memberships of most globalist institutions have a small minorities of Jews, and are majority Anglo in origin. One can simply look at the board of directors of groups at the top of the globalist pyramid like the International Monetary Fund, the Bank for International Settlements, or World Bank and verify that this is the case.

We can also examine the attendees of past globalist summits like the Bilderberg Group, or the World Economic Forum in Davos and see that again, some Jews might be involved, but are not a majority or even in the highest positions of authority. While the Rothschild family (Jewish) gets a lot of attention as being a major power center within globalist circles, we can see they are but one influence among many.

These people herald from all over the world, and are of every ethnicity and national affiliation one can imagine. So, the broad brush of white identity conspiracy becomes rather useless in helping us figure out who the globalists truly are. It actually misleads us and points us in the wrong direction, and perhaps this is its underlying purpose.

The fallback argument is that they might not be majority Jewish, but they are all “zionists”; which, again, is simply not true. Zionism is definitely a globalist scheme, but more of a side venture designed to manipulate some Jews and evangelicals into zealotry, to be exploited in supporting efforts like war in the Middle East. Zionism itself actually makes Jewish centers like Israel less safe and more prone to destruction. The globalists only care about Israel or the Jewish people in general in so much as they can be used as a tool for other more important efforts.

Anonymous said...

And, while I have criticized the actions of the Israeli government on many occasions (and been accused of being an anti-semite for it), this is not the same as attacking the Israeli people. Globalism threatens them just as much as it threatens others. I welcome readers to look over the rosters of many of the top globalist organizations; they will find a minority of zionists, not a majority.

If it's not about the Jews or zionism, then what is globalism really all about? It is vital that we look at the intent, actions, motivations and beliefs of these people. Hyperfocusing on their genetic backgrounds will get us nowhere. How do we know when we are dealing with a globalist? Let's look at some of the real and universal elements that make globalists an organized and identifiable culture, separate, distinct and destructive...

Globalism As An “Inevitable” Future

Globalists will often claim that globalism, the centralization of all governmental and economic power, is an inevitable byproduct of “progress”. They will state, without any evidence of course, that globalism represents a pinnacle of evolution in human society. Therefore, anyone that stands in the way of globalism is standing in the way of progress, which is apparently a cardinal sin in the new world order.

But centralization of power is nothing new, and dreams of global empire ruled by self appointed “elites” goes all the way back to Plato and his “Republic”. Utopia by the elites for the elites is a tale as old as mankind. It does not represent evolution, but regression to an ideology that human beings have been struggling for thousands of years to escape from.

We should also make the distinction here between globalists and useful idiots. Globalists are people in a position of power adequate enough to help affect the the changes and agendas they describe. Useful idiots (socialist/communists) might espouse globalist rhetoric, but they have no power. They are exploited as a blunt weapon by globalists, but they are not globalists, and will not likely benefit from globalism in the end.

Anonymous said...

End Of Sovereignty

Globalists treat the idea of sovereignty with disdain. Their attacks usually revolve around nationalism and they will incessantly pontificate on the virtues of open borders. They can also sometimes be caught criticizing the concept of individual sovereignty, but they do seem to fancy the idea that THEY are unique and superior individuals. Individuality and freedom are meant for them, but not for the rest of us.

Single Economic Authority And Monetary System

A key element of globalism is economic centralization which makes perfect sense when you understand that trade is the root of human civilization and survival. Trade is almost as important as the air we breath and the water we drink. The consistent plan presented by globalists is that the IMF in particular must become the bottleneck point for global economic management, and that all the world's major currencies will be absorbed by the IMF into their SDR basket system.

This would give the IMF the ability to dictate currency exchange rates on a whim, allowing them to homogenize currency values until they are so similar that a single world currency becomes a natural next step. This final product would be a cashless society, based on a digital blockchain-based currency or cryptocurrency.

Anonymous said...

Single World Government

Globalists all argue that the answer to most of the world's ailments is one world governance, or the end of nation states and cultural divisions in the name of “peace”. The UN is so far the impetus of this effort, but it is shadowed by various organizations like the IMF, BIS, World Bank, as well as dozens of think tank organizations like the CFR, Tavistock, the Trilateral Commission, Bilderberg, Darpa, etc., etc. A practice model for this type of government can be seen in the European Union, which is controlled by a supranational bureaucratic machine run by mostly faceless officials who are not elected and who do not answer to the public.

Globalists have different terms for the shift into a single world government or single currency system. They call it a "global reset, or a "new world order", or a "multipolar world order". But all of these marketing labels are basically referring to the same thing.

Close Association

Any politician that works closely with globalist institutions or think tanks is likely a globalist. Any politician or government official that associates regularly and cooperates with known globalists is probably also a globalist.

Environmental Crisis As Hegelian Threat

Not all globalists hit on this topic publicly, but most do. The strategy, which was planned by the Club Of Rome along with top globalists like former UN Director Robert Muller, was to create the idea of an environmental threat so potentially devastating that the only option would be for the public to accept global governance as the solution. Global warming and "climate change" became that existential threat.

It does not seem to matter how often or how brutal the climate change argument is debunked by real data; the globalists desperately push the ideology. It is a primary key to everything they hope to accomplish in terms of centralization, and their timeline is set for the year 2030. Globalists also seem to enjoy fabricating fake moral dilemmas which force people to choose between one evil solution or another. The fake moral dilemma here being that if we do not accept global centralization and elitist management of the planet, we are risking the destruction of our environment on an apocalyptic scale.

Anonymous said...

Psychological Similarities Of Globalists

Probably the most overwhelming epiphany I have come to in my 12 years of analysis into globalism and the nature of evil is that globalists are in fact tied together by a root mental illness or psychological aberration. This occurred during my research on narcissistic sociopathy, or what some circles might call “psychopathy”. Criminology indicates that not all criminals are full blown narcissistic sociopaths, but most full blown narcissistic sociopaths are criminals. Some are simply more successful criminals than others, and this usually depends on their ability to blend in and mimic or manipulate normal people.

Full blown narcissistic sociopaths (or psychopaths) make up around 1% of any given population, but are responsible for the vast majority of violent crimes or criminal enterprises. The lion's share of justice system resources are used in dealing with these people, as they are four to eight times more likely than the average person to use violence in daily interactions or as a tool to gain advantage, and twenty-five times more likely to end up in prison.

There is a long list of character traits that make a narcissistic sociopath, but the defining features are a complete lack of conscience and empathy, a propensity for moral relativism (the ability to rationalize any and all destructive behavior), a desperate need to be adored or admired by everyone around them, a feeling of being “more special” than most people, a feeling of superiority, delusions of grandeur or an inherent right to manage the lives of others, an obsessive need to control and manipulate, impulsive desires and deviant sexual inclinations, and elitist associations (they will only associate with people they feel are like them and are “equally superior”).

A defining fact of narcissistic sociopathy is that these traits are inborn, not a product of environment. In some cases environment can play a role in activating these traits, but if a person is not born with them, they generally do not adopt them later in life because of a traumatic environment. The following documentaries linked here and here are an excellent overview of high level narcissistic sociopaths.

Narcissistic sociopaths defy all forms of treatment and cannot be reformed. They have no concrete personality beyond these traits, therefore, if you remove the traits, they are left with nothing else. They are almost anti-human; while most people are born with unique personality combinations, narcissistic sociopaths have none, so they mimic the personalities of those around them, mirroring behaviors and collecting or stealing quirks.

Their primary drives are to fulfill their fantasies of superiority and godhood, as well as an endless quest to satiate their dopamine addiction. The more deviant the action, and the more successful they are at getting away with it, the more dopamine they generate and the more satisfied they feel. This leads to an endless cycle, seeking out more and more exploitation of others which becomes less and less satisfying, which leads to even greater deviance.

I came to realize in my studies that these characteristics described almost exactly the observable behaviors of globalists.

Anonymous said...

The difference being that globalists were so high functioning that they had actually built a society of narcissistic sociopaths that operated like a kind of cult, or a corporate entity. The only other historic example I could compare it to would be the mob, or other gangs which have blended into the surrounding normal society and operated in their midst.

I do not know if a society of narcissistic sociopaths with its own tribal customs, mythologies and beliefs has ever been recorded before. While psychopathic people have been known in the past to organize into groups for mutual benefit, the globalists are something different. They are an anomaly; a well maintained culture of parasites that has blended almost seamlessly within normal society in order to feed off of non-psychopathic and empathetic people. The best fictional representation I can think of is the vampire. They are so similar I sometimes wonder if folklore creatures like vampires were based on narcissistic sociopaths as a way to warn people of their presence.

Globalists are indeed a culture, a secretive and occult phenomenon that wants so badly to be recognized and worshiped, but fears public scrutiny. Their motivation at bottom is to condition or tear down normal, moral and free society until it becomes a place in which they can openly be what they really are without fear of judgment or consequences. They want to terraform civilization and make it a habitat that will accept them; a habitat for monsters surrounded by willing victims.

Anonymous said...

RayB 8:39 AM,

So your main point is that you were dismayed that Constance pointed out provable historical facts about two popes that seemed too positive to you. And in response, you would hasten to remind all readers who may be gullible to the clear and obvious Catholic apologetics going on here -- that they should always, always, always view Catholics 100% negatively?

Anonymous said...

Sing to the tune of The Lone Ranger TV show:

To the Left to the Left to the Left, Left, Left...

Fox All in for Brazile:
Deep State Propaganda Has Come To Live At Fox News!

It’s no longer just a matter of worry-laden public speculation: Fox News, America’s Number 1 cable network is going all in on making sure Donna Brazile has full access to their impressive audience!

Brazile’s first contribution to Fox News Wednesday night?

Informing a ready-made captive audience that it is former President Barack Obama—not current President Donald Trump—who should get the credit for all the new manufacturing jobs that Trump has created!

Anonymous said...

OUTFOXED - Documentary

OUTFOXED Effect - 10 Years Later

Anonymous said...

Anonymous 2:21 PM,

Brazile should have no credibility after the knowledge came out about her feeding questions to Hillary ahead of time, before the campaign debate. But maybe that has gone down the memory hole already, along with a torrent of new outrages of the day that have had more than two years to accumulate since.

Anonymous said...

To protect speech and democracy, President Trump must now seize the domain names of Google, Facebook, Twitter and other tech giants that abuse their power to silence human beings

Friday, March 22, 2019 by: Mike Adams

(Natural News) If you told me five years ago that I would wake up one day in America and have Facebook, YouTube, Twitter and Google all banning natural health news, and that the entire U.S. Congress and President of the United States would do absolutely nothing about it, and that there wouldn’t be a single prominent voice on the political Left who would speak out against the scourge of censorship, I wouldn’t have believed you.

Yet that’s where we are right now in America. Actually, it’s even worse. Our free speech video platform is under such intense threats and assault from upstream internet infrastructure providers that we are now being forced to implement outrageous limitations on speech in order to avoid the entire platform being annihilated (new announcement to come soon). Certain ISPs in New Zealand have now blocked the entire domain of, even after all the mosque shooting videos were removed from the platform under threat from other infrastructure providers. (New Zealand and Australia are now essentially Communist China in terms of internet censorship, with NZ rapidly becoming a new Islamic state that celebrates hijabs, a symbol of the oppression of...

Craig said...

Recent UN conference blatantly claims to want a New World Order, using "climate change" as the reason:

From Rebel Media:

UN environmental agency calls for “New World Order” | Alex Newman:

Sheila Gunn Reid of The and Alex Newman of The New American discuss everything the media isn't telling you about the 4th UN Environmental Assembly in Nairobi, Kenya.

Anonymous said...


In light of recent events (after the NZ incident especially) it seems that the handwriting may be on the wall indeed for places like this blogspot.

That being the case, I highly recommend that you have a backup blogspot prepped and ready to go...

The 2 Best Blogger and Blogspot Alternatives

Blogspot Alternatives: Best Paid And Free Blog Sites To Start

Top Ten Blogspot/Blogger Alternatives

"There are many sites which are much better than Blogspot to create a free blog..."

10 Best free blogging sites: BlogSpot & Blogger Alternatives

Anonymous said...

Show them the man, they'll find you the crime


Anonymous said...

Anon 12:06 PM

Thank you!

It'd be great if you would add the actual link to your posts, for example:

Show them the man, they'll find you the crime


Anonymous said...

Quote Of The Day:

"When Trent spoke to the queen in question...she confirmed that she had been convicted"

Anonymous said...

Posting as anonymous because it's getting dangerous to even report anything when living in NZ.
Unlike the USA there is no freedom of speech rights.
Crazy accusations of racism and hate speech are being leveled at people.
The Human Rights Commission are asking people to report anyone for percieved racism.
Any reporting that doesn't portray Islamic matters in a positive light can be considered as incitement.
This seems to be include historic factual news which is very alarming.
I have found that some old news articles from the New Zealands
leading news agencies are being blocked and knocked out of websites etc.
See below links for accusations against people for being white and religious.

When I sent a URL link to a friend from a news article it was blocked.
When I then cut and pasted the content into a email sp he could read it he never received the email either.
Real cold war environment developing.

Anonymous said...

(Lord Of The Rings)

An Epic Battle Of Good Against The Forces Of Evil Was Filmed In New Zealand...

-How Ironic!

Anonymous said...


Come to think of it, the ACTUAL exciting conclusion* to LOTR was deliberately left out of the trilogy!

Upon returning to The Shire, the quartet of hobbitses (er hobbits I mean) were absolutely horrified to discover that their entire idyllic land had been taken over from within and turned into a totalitarian nightmare by a ruthless, cunning and diabolical dictator** and his cohorts and collaborators!

So what did they do about it?


The Answer To 1984 Is 1776!
*(I'm not talking about the boarding the Elven ship to never-never land scene.)

**(A Global Governance kinda guy dontcha know!)

شركه نظافه بالدمام said...

تبحث عن شركة متخصصة فى خدمات التنظيف بالدمام بافضل المعدات والسوائل وثقة تمة فى العمل ودقة فى النتائج كل هذه المميزت توفرها شركة الجنرال الشركة الافضل والامثل فى الخدمات المنزلية بالدمام وبما اننا الشركة الافضل والامثل بدون منافس سوف نسعى لتوفر افضل الخدمات باقل تكلفة وبقدر كبير من الاهتمام والدقة عزيزى اينما كنت فى اى منطقة ا وحى تابع لمدينة الدمام اتصل بنا وسوف نصلك فى الحال شركة االجنرال للخدمات المنزلية
شركة نقل عفش بالدمام

شركة تسليك مجاري بالدمام

شركة مكافحة حشرات بالدمام

شركه تنظيف منازل بالدمام ومجالس وكنب وشقق

شركه مكافحه نمل ابيض بالدمام بافضل المبيدات

شركه تنظيف مجالس وكنب بالدمام بافضل مواد التنظييف

شركه تنظيف خزانات بالدمام مع التعقيم والغسيل

شركه تنظيف سجاد بالدمام

شركه تنظيف شقق بالدمام وفلل وقصور

Anonymous said...

Christine 8:33 AM,

I must say that's your best post ever.

(Can't read a word of it!)

Anonymous said...

Legal experts say censorship on gunman's manifesto went too far
21:21 pm on 24 March 2019

A complete ban on publishing or possessing the Christchurch gunman's manifesto may have gone too far, say some legal experts.

Black Mania. female hands isolated on black showing blank paper sheet
Photo: 123RF

The chief censor has classified the manifesto as objectionable, which brings the threat of up to 14 years' jail for anyone caught with a copy or caught sharing it.

But the Free Speech Coalition said the manifesto could be important for society to understand a dark part of our history.

"Most New Zealanders will have no interest in reading the rants of an evil person," coalition spokesman and constitutional lawyer Stephen Franks said.

"But there is a major debate going on right now on the causes of extremism.

"Kiwis should not be wrapped in cotton wool with their news and information censored. New Zealanders need to be able to understand the nature of evil and how it expresses itself."

Hitler's manifesto Mein Kampf was easily available in bookshops for that reason, he said.

Wellington public law specialist Graeme Edgeler said a full ban went too far, and there should be restricted access for some groups.

Journalists, researchers and academics could apply for an exemption to the ban, but that was not practical when working on tight deadlines, Mr Edgeler said.

"Given the censor says that there are groups of people that should have access, imposing a full ban seems the wrong way to go.

"It needs to be perhaps quite restricted - you have to be at least 18, you have to work for a news organisation which is subject to the New Zealand Broadcasting Standards Authority or the New Zealand Media Council - and [it should be that] if you do that, yes, you can have a copy."

But human rights lawyer Michael Bott said the ban was the right move, and requiring journalists and academics to make formal applications meant any dubious fringe publications or spurious research claims could be ruled out.

"The right to free speech can be constrained when it amounts to hate speech and there is a real risk that someone such as the Christchurch terrorist could basically become a martyr in the eyes of fringe groups who could then use the manifesto as a propaganda tool.

"The potential for harm is just so huge."

Many publications that could pose a "risk of social harm" had been censored in New Zealand before this, Mr Bott said.

He said, historically, a number of left wing publications were banned in New Zealand, but more recent bans included Danish publication The Little Red School-Book that instructed schoolchildren on sex and drug use, and books with instructions for building guns.

The manifesto was dangerous because it promotes "views that are toxic to democratic society and a culture of tolerance".

Chief censor David Shanks said yesterday the manifesto booklet was intended to inspire murder and terrorism, and most people would find it repellent.

"It is aimed at a small group who may be receptive to its hateful, racist and violent ideology, and who may be inspired to follow the example set by its apparent author."

Craig said...

...and the url for the piece @ 12:59PM above is already removed...

RayB said...

Very important and interesting Israeli News Live broadcast covering the relationship between vaccines and autism.

Anonymous said...

Globalization – Communism At Its Core
After the fall of the Berlin Wall and the disintegration of the Soviet Union, some people cheered the end of that stage of history and the end of communist ideology, while others worried about a clash of civilizations. But few realized that communism was taking on new forms and guises in its attempt to control the world. Its new banner is globalization.

With the Industrial Revolution and the development of science and technology, the movements of people and the changes in economics, politics, science and technology, and culture have become far more frequent. Today, modern telecommunications, transportation, computers, and digital networks have shrunk geographies and effaced boundaries that had stood for thousands of years. The world seems to have become small, and the interactions and exchanges between countries is unprecedented. The world has become more and more a unity. This strengthening of global collaboration is a natural result of technological development, the expansion of production, and migration. This kind of globalization is the result of a natural historical process.

However, there is ANOTHER kind of globalization, the result of communist ideologies hijacking the natural historical process of globalization in order to undermine humanity. This second form of globalization is the subject of this chapter.

The essence of globalization under the control of communism is essentially about the rapid and widespread dissemination of all the worst aspects of both communist and non-communist regimes. The means of this dissemination include large-scale political, economic, financial, and cultural operations that rapidly erase the boundaries between nations and people. The goal is to destroy faith, morality, and traditional cultures, which humanity depends on for survival and to enable its redemption. All of these measures are aimed at destroying humanity.

GrantNZ said...

Hi guys tried to post some comments on the blog yesterday and was blocked each time (about nine times).

GrantNZ said...

And it was only links to news articles

GrantNZ said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

Gee, why would they ban the NZ shooter's manifesto when they don't ban things like Hitler's Mein Kampf?

Let's think...

To, oh, I don't know, for one thing maybe...

LABEL him a 'Trump supporter' while PREVENTING the reader/viewer/listener from being able to independently VERIFY THAT?
"Conservative? Hardly. New Zealand Mass Shooter Is A Far-Left “Eco-Fascist” Who praised COMMUNIST CHINA

"As usual, the lying mainstream media is busy plastering up fake headlines all over the place about the latest mass shooting incident that took place in New Zealand, describing the alleged shooter as a 'Trump-supporting white supremacist' who hates Muslims for being brown. But the guy’s own 1,500-page manifesto, which Big Tech is actively trying to scrub from the web, by the way, tells a much different story.

"Far from being a rally-attending apologist for President Donald Trump like the fake media is now claiming, 28-year-old Brenton Tarrant, the man whom Australian media outlets have named as the shooter, is a self-described 'eco-fascist by nature' – meaning he’s a Leftist that’s more aligned with Democrats than Republicans.

"Tarrant clearly wrote in his rambling manifesto, in response to a question he apparently posed to himself, that he certainly does not support President Trump. 'As a policy maker and leader? Dear god no,' were Tarrant’s exact words, unequivocally indicating that, contrary to fake news claims, he likely wouldn’t be caught dead wearing a MAGA (Make America Great Again) hat.

"Tarrant’s diary goes on to reveal that he’s anything but a conservative, and is actually more aligned with radical domestic terrorist groups like Antifa. In response to another question he posed to himself about where he aligns both politically and socially, Tarrant had this to say, in no uncertain terms:

“'The nation with the closest political and social values to my own is THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA.'”

GrantNZ said...

It's back to the future only the years 1984 on the Orwellian time machine.

Any NZer who looks at or worst has a copy of that manifesto can face 14years imprisonment.

GrantNZ said...

A friend was given a MAGA hat at Christmas from a return visitor to the USA.
He thought nothing of it and wore it to a family dinner and was sworn at.
I would hazard a guess that if wore it in the street he would be assaulted an d probably be charged with hate speech.

RayB said...

How can this be? Thousands of Orthodox Torah Jewish Rabbis oppose the State of Israel because it is, in their words, an anti-God political state that violates the teachings of the Torah. What's interesting too is the fact that these Torah Orthodox Jews suffer persecution from the government in Israel ... just as Jews that convert to Biblical Christianity do as well.

GrantNZ said...

Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't after you.

Kurt Cobain

RayB said...

Complete and total exoneration of Trump by Mueller. NO RUSSIA COLLUSION (I'm shocked ... SHOCKED) and NO OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE.

Now, maybe we can have a real investigation into the dirty tricks campaign of Hillary Clinton, along with a serious look into the professional hit conducted upon on Seth Rich, the DNC's IT man that had conclusive information on the concerted destruction of Bernie Sanders' campaign perpetrated upon by the Clintonistas and Debbie Blabbermouth Schultz.

paul said...

Grant NZ
I'm praying for you, and all the Christians in NZ which it would really seem, are now living in a police state.
Maybe the powers that be, figure they can practice their newworaldorder in a nice microcosm of an island while they warm up for the bigger takeover of everything.

paul said...

Ray B
Prosecutors NEVER exonerate anyone.
Prosecutors either bring an indictment, or shut the heck up.
Constance, isn't that right?

Anonymous said...

Paul 6:02 PM

Funny that you should mention that because I'd been remembering what NZ evangelist Barry Smith had mentioned years ago:

That Australia/New Zealand was the NWO's preferred Beta test area for their programs before rolling them out elsewhere on Earth.

Anonymous said...

The Seth Rich Murder Case

Anonymous said...

Vince Foster Murder Case Documentaries




Anonymous said...

Paul 6:05 PM

To combine two old sayings:

A day late and a dollar short but better late than never...

"As technologies like DNA testing have become more widely used, some prosecutors’ offices have begun to take responsibility for correcting their own errors. In the last seven years, almost two dozen offices in 11 states and the District of Columbia have opened conviction-integrity units to re-examine old cases. But the units vary widely in effectiveness. Half have never exonerated anyone, while two, in Brooklyn and in Harris County, Tex., were responsible for one-third of last year’s exonerations.

"It is good to see any degree of self-reflection and accountability from prosecutors, who wield enormous and often unreviewed power in the criminal justice system. It would be even better for them to put in place safeguards that would prevent wrongful convictions in the first place."

RayB said...


Mueller would have given his right arm if he could have found enough evidence to either indict (on ANYTHING) or at least warrant a vote for impeachment in the House of Reps. ... even though "removal" would have never happened in the Senate because you need 2/3 to vote for.

You can bet that Mueller had nothing to hang a case upon, so, in effect, I don't think it's a stretch to say Trump was "exonerated."

Who knows? Perhaps Trump had a lot of dirt on Clinton and DNC that he threatened, through a "source" with plausible deniability, to unload if this investigation went any further? It wouldn't be the first time that politicians didn't want to "go there" because it would expose a lot of dirt on their side.

As a side bar, Nixon attempted that himself once he recognized that he was the victim of a Coup. He told the CIA that if he is "investigated" by the House, etc. there might be some secrets that would be forced into the open ... referring to the "that Bay of Pigs thing" which was a CIA covert operation, that he was also implying led to JFK's assassination. It was a real threat, but, it obviously failed. The Deep State took him down over a 3rd. rate "burglary" that was orchestrated, not by Nixon, but by CIA operatives!

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...


AOC, Sen. Feinstein calling for New Zealand-style nationwide gun confiscation and mass criminalization of gun owners...

GrantNZ said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

New Zealand's Descent Into An Islamic State Is A Huge Warning To America With The 'Thought Police' Now Out In Full Force!

Anonymous said...

Its Time To Replace Americas Socialist Indoctrination Centers The Left Calls Universities

Anonymous said...

Christchurch Used To Silence Questioning On Global Scale

And as New Zealand makes asking questions a crime, reporter Greg Reese looks at all the suspicious and anomalous details that the world has been discussing in regard to the recent Christchurch mosque shooting:

Anonymous said...

“There will be, in the next generation or so, a pharmacological method of making people love their servitude, and producing dictatorship without tears, so to speak, producing a kind a kind of painless concentration camp for entire societies, so that people will in fact will have their own liberties taken away from them, but rather enjoy it, because they will be distracted from any desire to rebel by propaganda or brainwashing enhanced by pharmacological methods. And this seems to be the final revolution.” — Aldous Huxley

Anonymous said...

The forgotten anti terrorism raids.
Much of the details around survailance recordings etc was suppressed.

GrantNZ said...

Hi Constance,

Have you received any of my emails or have they just disappeared?

Anonymous said...

How do we escape the Bermuda Triagle of email?.
Perhaps the triangle has an all seeing eye in the middle which determines those that pass.
Images of the "Eye of Sauron" from Lord of the Rings spring to mind.

Anonymous said...

P.S. To my 10:21 PM

One Reason Why Americans are Sheeple: FLUORIDE

From American Patriot Friends Network

To Whom It May Concern:

"I, Oliver Kenneth Goff was a member of the Communist Party and the Young Communist League, from May 2, 1936 to October 9, 1939. During this period of time, I operated under the alias of John Keats and the number 18-B-2. My testimony before the Government is incorporated in Volume 9 of the Un-American Activities Report for the year 1939.

"While a member of the Communist Party, I attended Communist underground training schools outside the City of New York: In the Bues Hall, and 113 East Wells Street, Milwaukee, Wisconsin. The East Wells Street School operated under the name of the Eugene Debs School. Here, under the tutoring of Eugene Dennis, M. Sparks, Morris Childs, Jack Kling and others, we were schooled in the art of revolutionary overthrow of the established Government.

'We were trained on...the art of poisoning water supplies.

"We discussed quite throughly the fluoridation of water supplies and how we were using it in Russia as a tranquilizer in the prison camps. The leaders of our school felt that if it could be induced into the American water supply, it would bring-about a spirit of lethargy in the nation; where it would keep the general public docile during a steady encroachment of Communism."

"We discussed in these schools, the complete art of revolution...but it was felt by the leadership, that if a program of fluoridating of the water could be carried out in the nation, it would go a long way toward the advancement of the revolution."

The above statements are true.


Oliver Kenneth Goff

“'Fluoridation is the greatest case of scientific fraud of this century.'

– Robert Carlton, Ph.D, former EPA scientist, 1992

"The history of forcing fluoride on humans through the fluoridation of drinking water is wrought with lies, greed and deception. Governments that add fluoride to drinking water supplies insist that it is safe, beneficial and necessary, however, scientific evidence shows that fluoride is not safe to ingest and areas that fluoridate their drinking water supplies have higher rates of cavities, cancer, dental fluorosis, osteoporosis and other health problems."

"Water Fluoridation Is Anything But Safe... Clean pure water is a prerequisite to optimal health, and industrial chemicals, drugs and other toxic additives really have no place in our water supplies. So I urge you to join the Fluoride Action Network's efforts 12 and your local anti-fluoride movements in the US and Canada to clean up our water."

RayB said...

To Anon @ 2:28 AM ...

I had an old high school friend of mine that became a Christian about the same time that I did attempt to tell me about the health risks involved with Fluoride years ago. I didn't listen. Then I started to do some research and was quite surprised by what I found. The defining moment came when I watched a video presentation by Charlotte Gerson of the Gerson Clinic, in which she read the "small print" that is on every toothpaste package, i.e., the WARNING that if a child swallows their toothpaste, to contact the local POISON CONTROL CENTER! Anything you put into your mouth is internalized to a degree whether you swallow it or not. Literally, the next day, my wife and I quit using Fluoride toothpaste. (We have well water so thankfully we don't have to contend with that).

Also, what I have known for YEARS, is that our food supply has been heavily tainted with pesticides, chemicals, hormones, excessive fat, sugar, salt, etc. The American diet is literally the most toxic in the entire world. The American people are being poisoned by the "food" that they eat, which in most cases, shouldn't even be classified as food. Scientific studies are now showing that young CHILDREN are developing heart disease, diabetes, cancer, high blood pressure, obesity, etc., etc. This is all due to the junk that they are eating, along with getting next to zero exercise.

What's the answer? My wife and I have pretty much eliminated all processed foods from our diet and have been on a "Plant Strong" diet ... no meat, fish, poultry, dairy whatsoever .... along with very little oil. We eat fresh organic vegetables and fruit along with beans, brown rice, whole grains, seeds and small quantities of nuts. Prior to changing our diet, etc., I had a very serious heart condition that typically results in a high mortality rate. By eliminating all of this junk food and along with exercise, my condition has been literally REVERSED with zero medication. I also have been able to maintain a very healthy weight without "starving" myself. With this diet which is food rich and low calorie content, you can eat as much as you want and you will not gain weight!

I strongly encourage everyone to do the research. You will find out that most diseases are diet and lifestyle related that can be prevented and REVERSED. The vicious cycle in this country is that people are becoming sick because of what they put into their bodies, then they go to a Dr. to get either an operation or are prescribed drugs (with enormous bad side effects) and NOTHING is cured, only the "symptom" is treated. The entire system is a fraud, but it is a HUGE money maker for the medical profession, insurance companies and Big Pharma! Wake up people, there is a better way that leads to REAL health.

Anonymous said...

Sign the Need to Impeach Petition
Join 7,687,609 Americans
Be part of the first 8 million
With a majority of seats in the House of Representatives, Democrats can initiate impeachment proceedings against Donald Trump.
Donald Trump has admitted his campaign colluded with the Russian government to get elected, failed in his duty as Commander in Chief to defend our democracy, takes money from foreign governments daily, actively obstructs justice, and thinks he is above the law.
We the people must impeach this president. Sign on now.


Anonymous said...

January 25, 1945: Grand Rapids, Michigan became the first city in the world to add fluoride to its public water supply.

I was born, and raised in Grand Rapids, and I can tell you that I had a LOT of cavities! Now I live in rural New England and drink well water, and brush my teeth with nothing but baking soda, and I'm still alive and strong at 64.

RayB said...

To Anon @ 10:21 AM ...

Give it up and go march in another parade, maybe for the New Green Deal?

Pelosi already announced that "impeachment is out of the question." Furthermore, even if they got an impeachment vote in the House of Reps, 2/3 majority is required for removal in the Senate, and that sir/mam aint gonna happen!

Anonymous said...

Grant & Co.,

(I hope those help!)

Anonymous said...

RayB 10:42 AM,

Considering the timing coming now just when Mueller's 2 year long investigation ended WITHOUT indicting him, I'm thinking that was likely an attempt at a tongue-in-cheek joke, like if they would've put a 'Support Hillary Clinton For President 2016' link and (supposed) reasons to vote for her the day AFTER the election!

Anonymous said...


(Maybe not but it IS a joke nonetheless!)

Anonymous said...

RayB 7:35 AM

Concept-related articles:

Diet: Plant-Based Diets - An Overview of Options for Optimal Health

The Mediterranean Diet Reduces Mortality From All Causes

Fad diets and the decline of the American diet

Is the Paleo Diet the healthiest diet to hit mainstream?

Health blogger threatened with jail time for advocating Paleo diet that cured his diabetes

Water: Pharmaceuticals in the Water - Why Medication Contamination is a Danger to Our Health and the Environment (transcript)

Food: The Honest Food Guide empowers consumers with independent information about foods and health

Dan Bryan said...

Link between Aluminum and the Pathogenesis of Alzheimer's Disease: NIH.GOV
Yet they are spraying nano-aluminum particles in the geoengineering aerosol spraying (chem trails)

Fluoride combined with even trace amounts of aluminum in water can cause major brain damage. Notice the spike of autism as well.

Craig said...

Trump, Russia, Possible Collusion (REMIX)

"People are very worried."

Anonymous said...

With America's Food Prices Expected To SKYROCKET, Are Catastrophic Floods 'A Sign From God' (&/Or) A Result Of Globalist's Weather Warfare Upon America?

Now They Warn America's Breadbasket Under Water Could Be 'The New Normal'

While reading the facts and opinions shared within this ANP story, we ask you to please keep the following words in mind allegedly uttered by globalist Henry Kissinger all the way back in 1974: 

"If you control the food supply, you control the people". 

For those who are unaware, following March's 'bomb cyclone' and record amounts of snow across large parts of the country, the Weather Channel recently put out this story warning of historic and widespread flooding across vast swaths of Central and Midwestern USA as snow melts, leaving huge parts of 'America's breadbasket' under water.

As this story over at WYFF reports, Midwestern flooding could become 'the new normal' though officials are blaming 'global warming' and 'climate change' for the disasters that have already caused over $1.4 BILLION worth of losses to the US food supply in Nebraska alone with experts warning that the flooding has only just begun.  

As we'll see in the map below, huge parts of the areas where much of America's food is grown are now underwater with severe and moderate flooding all along the Mississippi and Missouri Rivers, leaving many farms completely under water, with levees compromised, animals dead and crops meant to be eaten instead destroyed. These facts cannot be ignored.:

The floods were triggered by a “bomb cyclone,” a “hurricane-like” winter storm that dumped heavy rains onto snow that had not yet melted, reports Alex Horton of the Washington Post. The situation was intensified, according to the New York Times’ Adeel Hassan, by floods this past September and October, which left the soil saturated and unable to absorb water. The deluge consequently spread quickly, spilling into rivers and streams and causing them to overflow. Some 200 miles of levees have now been compromised in Nebraska, Iowa, Missouri and Kansas, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers said, per USA Today’s John Bacon and Doyle Rice. 

Nebraska has been particularly hard hit. Three-quarters of its 93 counties have declared a state of emergency...

Leviticus 26:18-29

Anonymous said...

(Minor Correction)

Anonymous said...

EU controversial copyright law due for FINAL Vote...

Anonymous said...

REPORT: Being on China social blacklist 'worse than PRISON'

Anonymous said...


ENDS PROGRAM As Chemical's Danger Becomes Apparent!

Anonymous said...

Everything Leads Right Back To Obama And Hillary: Is It Time For The Traitor's Heads To Roll?
I, like millions of other angry Americans, want justice for President Trump, the independent media, and millions of other Patriotic Americans who have been called 'Nazis' and 'Russian trolls' and thoroughly slandered by the rabid dogs in the msm and the leftist politicians who've been blatantly lying to the American people over and over again the past several years.

With much of the rest of the America sure to get caught up to speed in the days ahead while Hollywood celebrities go into hilarious meltdowns and msm talking heads try to figure out how to spin Robert Mueller's revelations and the Demonrats in Congress turn to 'plan B', we look forward to 'America's Revenge' unfolding in the days and weeks ahead.

As the Gateway Pundit reported in this recent story, Rep. Devin Nunes will be making criminal referrals to Attorney General Bill Barr on the FBI and DOJ officials who perpetrated this hoax that has gone on for nearly 3 years now, dating back to late 2015 and early 2016, well before the November 2016 election was even held. And with this hoax and 'insurance policy' that didn't pan out the way they hoped it would for the Demonrats likely leading directly back to Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton herself, as Susan Duclos reported within this ANP story, with 'justice' moving from Mueller's investigation to that of John Huber who is also investigating 'Uranium One', we may soon be witnessing what most of us never believed was possible.

And with even President Trump now mentioning the 'T' word as was reported in this new Breitbart story, we see in his remarks below that he's been paying attention to the evil-doers in America for a long time. Are treason charges for 'deep state crooks' ahead?

POTUS's remarks today from Breitbart:

“There are a lot of people out there that have done some very very evil things, very bad things. I would say treasonous things against our country," Trump said. "And hopefully, people that have done such harm to our country, we’ve gone through a period of really bad things happening. Those people will certainly be looked at. I have been looking at them for a long time."

The president commented on the conclusion of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation during a White House event hosting Israeli Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu.

Trump did not specifically name the people he wanted to be investigated but hinted that they had a lot to do with triggering the special counsel investigation.

'Why haven’t they been looked at? They lied to Congress. Many of them, you know who they are,' he said. 'They’ve done so many evil things.'

Trump hinted that the country had to make sure that rogue forces in the FBI and the Justice Department could not bring a similar phony case against another president in the future.

"What they did, it was a false narrative, it was a terrible thing. We can never let this happen to another president again," he said.
And let there be no doubt about it, this entire 2+ year fiasco leads right back to Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. As Michael Goodwin over at the NY Post recently reported, a great way that President Trump and the DOJ could end our 'national nightmare' would be for them to investigate the crimes committed by Hillary Clinton once again, this time via a fair and impartial investigation rather than by her own corrupt cronies looking to score brownie points with the person they firmly believed would be the next US President.

With the collapse of Hillary's big lie now complete, America needs justice now or 2020 may be the start of another nightmare. As PJ Media reported within this new story, the 'real threat' to America, our freedom and our Republic isn't Russia, it's the Democratic party.

RayB said...

53 Studies conclude that Fluoride is linked to diminished IQ levels ....

RayB said...

All 16 charges against Jussie Smollet have been "suddenly dropped." Smollet will face ZERO justice (here on Earth that is) regarding his "alleged" staging of a racist/homophobic violent hate crime, along with filing a false police report, etc.

Isn't American Justice just the greatest there is? It seems the scales of Lady Justice have been tipped and her blindfold has a few holes in it. Whatever, Jussie is free to go.

Anonymous said...

US State Dept Video Spotlights Third Temple On Temple Mount!

Anonymous said...

Wikipedia Editors Paid to Protect Political, Tech, and Media Figures!
[They're] paid by media clients such as NBC and Axios to help diminish critical material. Paid editors operating in a similar manner to Sussman have worked on behalf of CNN contributor Hilary Rosen and the CEOs of Reddit and Intel, among other clients.

Speaking of internet-related manipulations...


Anonymous said...

'Dark Day For Internet Freedom': EU lawmakers APPROVE Controversial Reform

Julia Reda, a German MEP with the Pirate Party, describes the occurance today as a “dark day for internet freedom."

Anonymous said...

Here we go!

GUESS Who Said:

Time for Obama Admin to Account for ‘Historic Abuse of Government Surveillance Powers’



Anonymous said...

Jussie Style Justice!

I kinda doubt it would work like that for me?

Anonymous said...

Do Water Filters Remove Fluoride?

November 1, 2017
By Jack Wilson
The best way to protect yourself from this poison is by filtering your water supply. The question is, do water filters remove fluoride?

What is Fluoride?

You might have been surprised to find out that fluoride is a poison, but it will also be a bit surprising to know that it is also of the most common elements found in nature. Fluoride is present almost everywhere on the planet. It can even be found in food items.
Is Fluoride Always Present in Drinking Water?

As mentioned earlier, fluoride is a very common element and is present just about anywhere on earth. So, even if your water district isn’t adding fluoride to your water supply, there’s no assurance that the water is free from fluoride.

Water districts usually have a good filtration and water treatment system, but unless you do a specific test for fluoride in your water, there’s no way of knowing if the element is present or not.

If you’re concerned about fluoride being present in the water, then your best course of action would be to install a water filter that is capable of removing fluoride as well as other contaminants. But, do water filters remove fluoride?

Do Water Filters Remove Fluoride?

Unfortunately, not all forms of residential water filters are capable of removing fluoride from the water. For example, activated carbon filters, which are actually one of the more popular types of water filters in the market, do not remove fluoride from the water. In fact, most regular home water filters do not have this ability as well.

The water filters that are capable of removing fluoride are those that treat water using reverse osmosis, activated alumina, and ion-exchange resins. These are not your common household filters. To purchase these types of filters, you would need to contact companies that specialize in the production of high-quality water filters.

Can You Avoid Fluoride by Drinking Bottled Water?

You may be thinking that the best way to avoid fluoride is to buy bottled water. This is a great idea, but only if you purchase spring water or brands that actually advertise the level of fluoride in their products.

Many bottled water manufacturers are not concerned about fluoride in their products 

Anonymous said...

Top 10 Ways You Can Remove Toxic Fluoride From Your Body

"It’s IMPERATIVE that Americans learn how to defend ourselves from our poisonous water supply!"

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...

Devin Nunes: No 'Republicans Or Any American Should Be Celebrating' Until 'Bad Cops' Get Punished

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...

What They Don't Want You to See in The NZ Mosque Shooting Video – And It's Not “CGI"!

March 26, 2019

RayB said...

Really weird video, posted by the Catholic site LifeSiteNews that depicts "pope" Francis pulling his ring hand away from the "faithful" that want to kiss the ring of "his holiness." Where in the Bible is there any illustration of any of the Apostles having a "ring" that is kissed by anyone? Funny thing ... I can't seem to find it.

Anonymous said...

Speaking Of Rings...

paul said...

Ray B
Weird video alright.
Somebody explain that one to me.
Some of those people seemed to understand that he would pull his hand back, so they tried to out smart him and do a quick kiss.
Truly bizarre.

Anonymous said...

PF was obviously running late and in his holiness's haste he hurried out of the papal potty without washing his hands.

paul said...

Ray B
But to answer your question, the Apostle's ring is in the same chapter where they are all sitting in a giant cathedral in Rome, on top of unimaginable riches of gold, silver, art treasures, real estate, and worldwide political power, and people are lining up to kiss Peter's infallible right hand, while Mary looks down from above on a giant ceiling, adorned with the greatest of the artwork of man's hands, because she is the actual one who forgives everyone.
Don't you remember that chapter?

paul said...

I actually thought the same thing; maybe it was a hygiene thing. Maybe his left hand was okey but not the right one?
What? Don't most people wash both hands at the same time?
Maybe a few too many pedophile homosexuals had already slobbered on the ring earlier in the day.
I know, that's really not funny.
It's really really not funny at all.

Anonymous said...

Pagan God Dagon And The Pope - a tale that will shock you!

“And the lords of the Philistines gathered them together to offer a great sacrifice unto Dagon their god, and to rejoice; for they said, Our god hath delivered Samson our enemy into our hand.” [Judges 16:23]

This was after Delilah had deceived Samson to having his head shaved. 

Dagon, the fish-god of the Philistines and Babylonians, wore a fish hat that is still seen today with Roman Catholic Church’s pope and bishops.

“The miter is derived directly from the miters of the ancient pagan fish-god dagon and the goddess Cybele. The papal miter represents the head of Dagon with an open mouth, which is the reason for the pointed shape and split top.”

In their veneration and worship of Dagon, the high priest of paganism would actually put on a garment that had been created from a huge fish!

The head of the fish formed a mitre above that of the old man, while its scaly, fan-like tail fell as a cloak behind, leaving the human limbs and feet exposed.

In Chaldean times, the head of the church was the representative of Dagon, he was considered to be infallible, and was addressed as ‘Your Holiness’.

Nations subdued by Babylon had to kiss the ring and slipper of the Babylonian god-king. The same powers and the same titles are claimed to this day by the Dalai Lama of Buddhism, and the Pope.

Moreover, the vestments of paganism, the fish mitre and robes of the priests of Dagon are worn by the Catholic bishops, cardinals and popes.

The chief priests wore miters shaped like the head of fish, in honor of Dagon, the fish-god, the lord of life...

paul said...

So there news just came out that indeed it was a hygiene thing.
Apparently his left hand, which everyone was allowed to kiss, is immaculate.

Dan Bryan said...

Pope Francis keeps asking everyone to pray for him! I think that is a good starting point.
Maybe the Lord is convicting this pontificate of that piece of idolatry, the ring kissing thing. In any case it looks awkward none the less.

paul said...

I found the reference you were looking for.
It's in Packalius chapter 2.

Anonymous said...

There Is Mysterious ‘Undocumented Technology’ HIDDEN On Intel Computer Chips, Researchers Say!

Computer experts have claimed that the chips which power MOST IF THE COMPUTERS IN THE WORLD are hiding mysterious and ‘undocumented’ technology. Analysts from Positive Technologies alleged that Intel chips and processors contain an enigmatic ‘logic signal analyser’ CAPABLE OF READING ‘almost ALL DATA ON A COMPUTER’. The claims are likely to alarm conspiracy theorists [as there are] long-standing rumours that the NSA has hidden ‘back doors’ on computer chips which are used to spy on billions of people. Maxim Goryachy and Mark Ermolov revealed their findings at the Black Hat Conference, a gathering of hackers and cybersecurity specialists in Singapore.

RayB said...

Hey Paul ...

Is Packalius in the OT or NT?

Anonymous said...

Neither OT Nor NT But WI

(The Green Bay Packalius)

Anonymous said...

I spy: How Android phones keep tabs on our every move

Anonymous said...

Question: What would be the Liberal, etc. response if a:

NO Audio or Video Recording!

NO Media (TV, Radio, etc.)
White Press Only!

'Mayor's Forum' were held?

“Black Press Only” For Savannah Mayor’s Forum. White, Latino, Asian, & Native Press BARRED!

Anonymous said...

Former Deputy Asst. Attorney General: If Convicted of Corruption, State’s Attorney Kim Foxx Faces Up to 20 Years in Prison
John Yoo: If you look at the details of this case where Mrs. Obama’s chief of staff calls the prosecutor Kim Foxx and all of the sudden these machinations occur and then the case gets dropped. That is exactly what the Justice Department is supposed to be involved in, to make sure there is no corruption in state government. I hope that President Trump is right and that the FBI is starting an investigation to look into this."

Laura Ingraham: What’s the potential criminal exposure here, both for Foxx and the state’s attorney office itself?

John Yoo: So Foxx could be potentially liable of what is called mail wire fraud of depriving citizens of their honest services, which if she is convicted, this is the standard law that is used to go after corrupt state officials… the maximum sentence is 20 YEARS IN PRISON.

Anonymous said...

Tech giants working to roll out online “gulag” for Americans!

Welcome to America, the land of the free… unless you happen to voice an opinion the tech giants don’t agree with, in which case you’re as good as dead. They might not physically place your body in the firing line, but their censorship and de-platforming is effectively killing those who dare to share an opposing point of view – and it’s a problem that is poised to get even worse.

In a recent opinion piece for The Hill, Donald Trump Jr. drew attention to the growing problem of Big Tech’s censorship of conservatives. Listing problems like shadow bans on Twitter and Facebook, pulled ads for Republican candidates and the demonetization of videos on YouTube, he wrote: “Our right to freely engage in public discourse through speech is under sustained attack, necessitating a vigorous defense against the major social media and internet platforms!”

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 316   Newer› Newest»