Bishop Williamson: The Modern Catholic Church is an “abomination” to be shunned

By BISHOP WILLIAMSON
Eleison Comments
December 28, 2019

LD (introduction) :  The famous Catholic dissident and “Holocaust denier”, Bishop Williamson, here invokes Shakespeare to argue that the Catholic Church, initially betrayed by Martin Luther and King Henry VIII through the Protestant Reformation, has now been betrayed yet again from within by the Catholic Church’s relatively recent “reforms”.

This second betrayal took place in 1962-1965 by the misguided reforms of Vatican II, which were thrust upon the Catholic Church in an inept and authoritarian way, making a mockery of many of the core beliefs of our Christian ancestors.

Neither St Augustine nor St Jerome, translator of the great Vulgate Bible from Hebrew and Greek into Latin, would have been happy with these outrageous reforms.

None of the early Church Fathers, who believed devoutly that the Jews were collectively to blame for the death of Christ—the crime of ‘deicide’—would have approved of the Pope’s sudden decision that the Jews were not to blame after all but were spotlessly innocent of the death of Christ. Instead, the finger of blame was now pointed at Pontius Pilate and the Romans. And the account given in the New Testament of the Jews clamouring for the death of Christ and declaring “His blood be on us and our children.” (Matthew 27:24-25), was dismissed as an early example of antisemitic hate speech—henceforth known as the “blood curse”.

Finally, none of the great Christian martyrs, from the early Christians who were prepared to be eaten alive in the Circus Maximus by lions, to St Thomas More who was ready to have his head chopped off on the orders of Henry VIII, would have died for the post-Vatican II Catholic Church. This newfangled monstrosity was not the Church founded by Jesus Christ, by the man who founded no Church at all if the truth be told, but who simply left behind a corpus of oral teachings which were later refined and organised into orthodoxy by St Paul, St Jerome, St Augustine and a panoply of popes and cardinals in subsequent centuries.

I hope this brief introduction will give no offence to Bishop Williamson if he should read it, and I apologise if it should contain any errors. [LD]

—   §   —

Speak Up!

The Archbishop said, “Rome is no more in Rome.”
Elsewhere today is Catholics’ spiritual home.

If there have been great minds from the past, it is because they will have been thinking on great matters, which means, explicitly or implicitly, matters of God, and if they were truly great minds, their thinking will have been not just destructive. One such mind was certainly England’s Shakespeare.

As a Catholic, Shakespeare grappled with his country’s apostasy being fulfilled just as he was reaching his prime, around 1600. But that turning of England to Protestantism meant that if he did not want to be hanged, drawn and quartered, he had to disguise his Catholic message, as Clare Asquith proved in her book of 2005, Shadowplay, where she took English literature way above English “patriots” and the dwarves of literary criticism.

To take just one example, in the book’s Appendix on Shakespeare’s Sonnet 152, she shows how from start to finish, beneath the obvious application to a woman Shakespeare has known, there is a complete second meaning of far wider application to himself as a writer who has failed to warn his countrymen as he should have done. Here are the 14 lines of the sonnet together with their obvious meaning:—

In loving thee thou know’st I am forsworn
But thou art twice forsworn to me love swearing,
In act thy bed-vow broke and new faith torn,
In vowing new hate after new love bearing.
But why of two oaths’ breach do I accuse thee,
When I break twenty? I am perjured most,
For all my vows are oaths but to misuse thee,
And all my honest faith in thee is lost;
For I have sworn deep oaths of thy deep kindness,
Oaths of thy love, thy truth, thy constancy,
And, to enlighten thee, gave eyes to blindness,
Or made them swear against the thing they see.
    For I have sworn thee fair: more perjured eye,
    To swear against the truth so foul a lie.

Paraphrased in modern English:

You know I break a promise by loving you, but by
swearing you love me, you break two promises: you
forsook your husband’s bed, then returned to him
(“new faith,” “new love”) only to forsake him again.
But why do I accuse you of breaking two oaths when
I break twenty oaths? It is I the greater perjurer, for
To your own harm I have sworn oath upon oath about
your goodness when I well knew you were not good.
Thus I have been swearing that you are very kind,
very loving, very truthful, very constant, and to
put you in a good light, I have made me see what I
Did not see, or, have sworn I saw not what eye saw.
For I have sworn you were good. What terrible
Perjury on my part, when that is so untrue!

Interestingly, the sonnet’s text makes more sense in its hidden meaning, referring to faithless England, than in its apparent meaning, referring to Shakespeare’s unfaithful mistress.

Thus “Merrie Englande” had been a faithful wife of the Catholic Church for 900 years. By Henry VIII’s Act of Supremacy (1534), (“In Act”) England broke its marriage (“bed-vow”) with the Catholic Church and took Protestantism as its lover. Then it remarried the Catholic Church under Mary Tudor (1553, “new faith,” “new love”), only to fall back into adultery with Protestantism under Elizabeth I (1558, “new faith torn,” “new hate” of the Catholic Church). But Shakespeare (1564–1616) blames himself for much worse infidelity, because down these years he has repeatedly glorified (“to enlighten thee”) England with its unfaithful Tudor rulers, for instance in his History Plays, glorified to England’s harm (“to misuse thee”), because as a Catholic he knew full well that Protestantism would be the ruin of “Merrie Englande.” Sure enough!

And today? The pattern repeats itself: for over 1900 years Catholics were faithfully married to the true Church, but with Vatican II (1962–1965) the mass of them followed bad leaders into more or less of adultery with the modern world (“bed-vow broke”). Then Archbishop Lefebvre (1905–1991) led many back to the truly Catholic Church (“new faith,” “new love,” or renewal of the old faith and the old love), only to see his successors at the head of the Society of St Pius X which he founded in 1970 fall back into an adulterous longing for a reunion with Conciliar Rome, by a “new hate” for the pre-Conciliar truth.

Conclusion? Any Shakespeares amongst us, or any Catholics, must speak up, that Pachamama Rome is, as such, nothing other than an abomination, to be shunned.

Kyrie eleison.

Source

114 thoughts to “Bishop Williamson: The Modern Catholic Church is an “abomination” to be shunned”

    1. The official holocaust story is full of holes. We know that there was a hospital, a pharmacy, an orchestra, a theatre, a library and a swimming pool at Auschwitz, for the use of the inmates. There were very few Jews claiming to have been eye witnesses to the use of gas chambers, and there were many who said thay never saw or heard of them during their confinement, but their evidence is largely ignored in the media propaganda scramble to demonize Germany. The German records showed concern about the inmate death rates. Hence the presence of Zyklon, a cyanide-based insecticide, used to kill the fleas that spread Typhus.

      Medical public health training speaks of “Institutional diseases” If you crowd people together in bad conditions they will die in great numbers of typhus, dysentery, TB, pneumonia, plus hunger and cold. During the American civil war, in a period of 14 months at Camp Sumter, located near Andersonville, Georgia, 13,000 (28%) of the 45,000 Union soldiers confined there died, and it isnt cold in Georgia.

      One factor that is never mentioned is the fact that Zyklon was expensive, irritant and dangerous to those moving the bodies, which would have carried cyanide residues.

      In fact the easiest, cheapest, painless and simplest way to kill a large number of people is by exposing them to the fumes of a badly ventilated oil stove. It happens by accident frquently, and tragically. The lethal agent is carbon monoxide.

      What matters here is the truth, and a thorough archaeological investigation of Auschwitz is requires,but is blocked by the Jewish Lobby.

    2. I would add that in 1944-5 the infrastructure of Germany was destroyed by continuous allied bombing, such that there was scarcesly a railway, road, bridge or power station intact. This resulted in collapse of utilities and consequent starvation, not just for the camps but for the urban population of Germany.

  1. There is something about the 70s decade which brought “reformation” to the Anglican Church, as well. In 1970, the 1928 Book of Commn Prayer was revised to accommodate feminist or sexless prayers, and refer to God as not necessarily masculine. Since that time, the Episcopal Church has become disgustingly “liberal” – even ordaining known sodomites to administer communion. The other Protestant denominations aren’t much better, either. Whenever I hear a preacher complain about church attendance being down, I remind him of this.
    The Catholic Church was a great “rock” for many, but that rock has been fragmented, and the others have followed…
    Godspeed, Bishop Williamson!

    1. Henry VIII’s Reformation:

      Definition: . THe GREATEST ACT of OUTRIGHT Thievery, PIllage, Plunder, Looting, Desecration and Wanton Vandalism in the Annals Of English History.

      But… guess what? It’s been a long time comin’….. but PAYBACK is on its way…. and there’ll be Hell To Pay

  2. “…None of the early Church Fathers, who believed devoutly that the Jews were collectively to blame for the death of Christ—the crime of ‘deicide’—would have approved of the Pope’s sudden decision that the Jews were not to blame after all but were spotlessly innocent of the death of Christ…”

    As a self-declared “anti-Semite”, always ready to condemn Jews when it is justified, I take offence at the idea that Jews are collectively and eternally guilty of a crime some of their people committed some 2000 years ago, because I don’t believe in collective, inherited guilt. My sense of justice is that a person is responsible only for his own behavior, not of that of his kinsmen or ancestors. So I don’t see this pronouncement of the Catholic Church as a kind of “heresy”.

    On the other hand, Jews would be wise to denounce the anti-Christian passages in the Talmud, if they prefer to improve relations with Christians.

    1. @ Franklin Ryckaert

      As a self-declared “anti-Semite”, always ready to condemn Jews when it is justified, I take offence at the idea that Jews are collectively and eternally guilty of a crime some of their people committed some 2000 years ago, because I don’t believe in collective, inherited guilt. My sense of justice is that a person is responsible only for his own behavior, not of that of his kinsmen or ancestors. So I don’t see this pronouncement of the Catholic Church as a kind of “heresy”.

      What you say sounds eminently reasonable on the surface, but there is something in your argument that fails to convince me at a much deeper level. Let me explain, and hopefully you will admit that the matter is far more complex than you have imagined it.

      Firstly, it seems extremely unjust, as you say, to blame a good Jew living today for being guilty of killing Christ 2000 years ago. The idea of collective ethnic guilt, applied to the whole Jewish race for an ancestral crime, is anathema to you. And to me.

      So far, so good. But you need to take note of two things:

      (1) The Jews refuse to accept collective guilt for the crime of ‘deicide’, but they are quite ready to ascribe collective guilt to the entire German people for the Nazi genocide of the Jews. Is this not a shocking example of double standards? Are not good Germans living today 100 per cent innocent for killing six million Jews in gas ovens, real or imaginary? Of course they are! So why should they be punished by having to pay exorbitant Holocaust reparations 70 years after the event?

      If the modern Germans are collectively guilty for the Holocaust, are not the Jews, by the same token, collectively guilty for ‘deicide’? After all, they themselves have already admitted their collective guilt by saying: “His blood be upon us and our children.”

      (2) The Catholic Church, in addition, is not being relentlessly vindictive in accusing Jews collectively of deicide for this reason: the entire Jewish people, it maintains, will be exonerated of the crime of deicide if it renounces Judaism and embraces Christianity. The mass conversion of the Jews to Christianity is sought as the ultimate solution to the Jewish problem. The individual Jew who burns his Talmud, who turns his back on the evil things written in the Old Testament, is forgiven. In short, Jews who become Christians are no longer considered Jews and cannot therefore be charged any longer with “deicide”.

      These two arguments, I hope you will admit, weaken your case substantially.

      If you want to let the Jews off the hook for the collective crime of deicide, you must first persuade them to stop blaming the entire German people for the collective crime of the Holocaust. And you must also try and put an end to their rapacity over extortionate amounts of Holocaust reparations exacted from Germany and Switzerland ad infinitum.

      1. @ Saki:
        As a Slovak-German Canadian, I agree with your rebuttal to Franklin. The only problem is : do you trust each individual Jew in their conversion to Christianity? That is the question: To Be or Not to Be. Throughout history Jews have converted to many things: Islam ( Don Meh Turkics, Saud family Royals), Spanish Catholics ( Marranos/ Conversos), Atheists ( Carl Sagan, Sigmund Freud, Henry Makow), Adam Weishaupt to Catholicism for the Jesuits, or Eastern Orthodox ( Brother Nathanael Kapner). I may be willing to listen to the likes of Ron UNZ (Unz Review), Adam Green, Henry Makow or Brother Nathanael, but I will not gamble my life on it! That is the difference. Jews if they renounce the Talmud and accept Christianity, must be questioned to determine the presence of the Holy Spirit in their talk and behaviour. You will know them by their Fruit. Only then will I accept the Jew as a Christian Brother in Christ! Not before!

      2. Storman’ Norman

        I see no reason to view the conversion of a Jew to Christianity with inordinate suspicion. The true Christian practises humility at all times and the last thing he will be disposed to do is to regard the Jewish convert as some kind of snake in the grass who needs “to be questioned to determine the presence of the Holy Spirit in their talk and behaviour.” Such a Christian is hardly a true Christian if he feels the need to set himself up as an examiner of his brother’s conscience, expecting the worst from his brother and looking for fault. He is in violation of Christ’s own teachings:

        “Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again. And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye. Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye? Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother’s eye.”

        — Matthew 7: 1-5

        Bear that advice in mind, my friend! How can you presume to set yourself up in judgement over the converted Jew when that Jew could be ten times holier than you are? 🙂

      3. @Saki January 1, 2020 at 12:18 am

        As you are one of the most mannerly and kind and fair posters I have read it behooves all who have the privilege of reading your posts to take under deep consideration your words.

        Amazon banned the copy of Two Hundred Years Together that was in English. The UNCENSORED COPY that is… Downloadable pdfs for the censored chapters of Alexander Solzhenitsyn’s 200 Years Together, so wrote Dr Kevin MacDonald some years ago, whether the chapters are still available is doubtful.

        theoccidentalobserver.net/articles/MacDonald-Solzhenitsyn-200-Years-Together-21.html

        Whether those translations exist now is relatively unimportant the TRUTH expressed by the magnificent Russian tell the whole tale:

        “You must understand. The leading Bolsheviks who took over Russia were not Russians. They hated Russians. They hated Christians. Driven by ethnic hatred they tortured and slaughtered millions of Russians without a shred of human remorse. The October Revolution was not what you call in America the ‘Russian Revolution.’ It was an invasion and conquest over the Russian people. More of my countrymen suffered horrific crimes at their bloodstained hands than any people or nation ever suffered in the entirety of human history. It cannot be overstated. Bolshevism committed the greatest human slaughter of all time. The fact that most of the world is ignorant of this reality is proof that the global media itself is in the hands of the perpetrators.”

        “We cannot state that all Jews were Bolsheviks. But: Without Jews there would never have been Bolshevism. For a Jew nothing is more insulting than the truth. The blood maddened Jewish terrorists had murdered sixty-six million in Russia from 1918 to 1957.”

        So Saki stay strong, GOOD will overcome Evil!

        The heart has a reason which the intellect does not attain.

      4. take mosquitoes as an example, their toll on humanity is second only to jews, but to blame individual mosquitoes for the crimes of the few bad ones is a veritable blood libel.

        i have known many good mosquitoes, the ones that did me no harm and for this reason i refuse to swat them without first giving them the benefit of doubt, namely, that they are Good Mosquitoes with just a few bad apples among them that give the entire species a bad name.

        in this 2020, just say no to mosquito intolerance, remember how many perish due to indiscriminate mosquitocide, especially in Germany!!!

        (there is a straight correlation useful for proving that most jews are actually Good Jews: consider how many jews are plumbers, construction workers, farmers, electricians, transportation personnel, cleaning staff, jews working night shift in warehouses and other essential occupations without which the world would grind to a screeching halt within hours—which is why i dread saturdays, when absolutely nothing ever functions due to jews taking well deserved rest from daily labors, sweat and toil that keeps the world running smoothly—e.g., all the jew bank tellers, which is why most antisemites get the wrong notion that jews own+control banks or have anything to do with usury and other bloodsucking practices—as innocent as mosquitoes)

      5. Yes, Jews use double standards, but still that doesn’t justify collective inherited guilt projected unto them. Two wrongs don’t make a right.

        However, crimes committed by a state must be compensated for by that state, without making every member of that state guilty, provided that there is a statue of limitations.

        It was the leadership of the Jews at that time and a Jewish crowd that was responsible for the execution of Christ by the Romans. Even if that crowd cried “His blood be upon us and our children”, then that doesn’t make it so. I don’t know what the statue of limitations for murder should be, but I think 2000 years is more than enough.

        Conversion to another religion should be out of genuine motives and not in order to escape collective guilt or discrimination.

        As I said, if Jews want to improve relations with Christians, they would be wise to denounce the negative passages in the Talmud about Christ and his mother. They would be wise also to express regret for what happened 2000 years ago, without accepting inherited “guilt” by doing so. Good relations must come from both sides.

      6. @ TLOA

        Thanks for your kind words. I will try my best to “stay strong”.
        It isn’t easy, that’s for sure! 🙂

        Regarding Solzhenitsyn, I believe the bits that have been translated of “Two Hundred Years Together” are still available.
        I have read a few chapters and found them extremely good, though I’m told the translations are done by amateurs (paid a pittance for the job) and that lots is missing in regard to scholarly commentary and reference notes.

        An authoritative translation needs to be done by someone bilingual in English and Russian who is also a reputable historian with a knowledge of Russian history. Apart from the fact that finding such a person is not easy, such a project requires a sympathetic publisher in America and England. No such publisher can be found. Most publishers and literary agents are Jews; the newspapers and magazines are run by Jews and their camp followers; and finally, all the book reviewers are either Jewish or gentiles who are in bed with the Zionists. Praising the book would be suicidal for any reviewer, and Amazon is sure to ban it, apart from most high street bookshops.

        We live in a world in which the blind lead the blind, and the only ones who talk any sense are probably the inmates of lunatic asylums. Welcome to the club! 🙂

      7. @ Lobro

        I loved your mosquito analogy. You are obviously a specialist in tropical diseases with a keen sense of humour. Gosh, I had quite a few chuckles over your hilarious post! 🙂

      8. @ Franklin Ryckaert

        Yes, on balance I think you have won this argument. I don’t think LD herself was seriously suggesting in her introduction that the Jews were collectively guilty of ‘deicide’. Her point was that this was the prevailing stance or official attitude of the early Church fathers, all of them pronounced antisemites, for several centuries: that the Jews were guilty of deicide.

        This was an inseparable element of Orthodox Christian dogma throughout the Middle Ages and beyond. Which is why it seemed quite a shock when in the 1962-1965 period of Vatican II, a Pope steps forward and proclaims: “Sorry, we Christians have been wrong about the Jews for almost 2000 years. Seems they were nice guys after all. Sincere apologies for blaming them all for killing Jesus Christ 2000 years ago. How darn silly of us!”

        Kiss kiss, we’re all friends now! Pontius Pilate to blame! Wicked Romans to blame! Caiaphas and a few Jews at the time also to blame, but rest assured that the Jews who shouted “Crucify him! Crucify him!” did so with tears in their eyes and voices high-pitched in anguish. After all, isn’t there a famous Chinese proverb, “When the Jew crucifies you, he cries out in pain.” 🙂

      9. @Saki

        “…Kiss kiss, we’re all friends now! Pontius Pilate to blame! Wicked Romans to blame! Caiaphas and a few Jews at the time also to blame, but rest assured that the Jews who shouted “Crucify him! Crucify him!” did so with tears in their eyes and voices high-pitched in anguish…”

        In my second comment I already have made it clear that I considered that shouting Jewish crowd as part of the “guilty” group :

        “…It was the leadership of the Jews at that time and a Jewish crowd that was responsible for the execution of Christ by the Romans. Even if that crowd cried “His blood be upon us and our children”, then that doesn’t make it so…”

        And I still stick to my idea that their guilt was not transferred to all later Jewish generations, because in my opinion “inherited guilt” does not exist.

      10. @ Franklin Ryckaert

        “And I still stick to my idea that their guilt was not transferred to all later Jewish generations, because in my opinion “inherited guilt” does not exist.”

        No problem, Franklin. I had already conceded that point to you: that inherited guilt does not exist. But you persist in not getting my point that modern Jews who tacitly support Caiaphas and his evil crowd of Christ killers, gloating over the death of Christ even today, are guilty of deicide by association.

        No one here is claiming that these modern Jews actually killed Christ in the flesh and are therefore literally guilty of ‘deicide’. I am saying that these malevolent modern Jews are just as bad, just as unregenerate, just as guilty as the original Christ killers, for being the type of men who would condone, support, cheer on, and gloat at the cruel death of a totally innocent man.

        You will find these Jewish scoundrels among the settlers of Israel today, spitting at Christians in the streets, and chanting: “IF CHRIST WERE ALIVE TODAY, WE’D KILL HIM AGAIN!” And according to you — in your nitpicking pedantry — these modern Jews are “NOT GUILTY” of deicide — though they support deicide to the hilt.

        And what think of then you of this vile, gloating comment by Sarah Silverman:

        “I hope the Jews did kill Christ! I’d fucking do it again in a second!”

        https://i.4pcdn.org/pol/1478754153997.png

        You’d give this evil Jewess a clean bill of health, would you?

        Well, I don’t! As far as I’m concerned, she is AS guilty of deicide as Caiaphas and his gang of gruesome miscreants.

        Stick up for the good Jews by all means, Franklin. That does you credit. But if you persist in acting as an apologist for the bad Jews too, for the most malevolent and psychopathic Jews alive today, you will lose all credibility.

        Respectfully,

        — SAKI

      11. @ Franklyn Ryckaert

        It seems you’re really being obtuse; this whole discussion has apparently gone completely over your head. For the last time, the sense in which the “early Church Fathers” “blame the jews” for deicide is not the same as imputing “guilt” for a crime in a worldly sense.

      12. You know what they say –

        “You can take the Jew out of the religion, but you can’t take the religion out of the Jew.”

        I think Voltaire said that; I dunno, mebbe I’ll ask Kevin.

    2. @ Franklyn Ryckaert

      “As a self-declared ‘anti-Semite,’ always ready to condemn Jews when it is justified, I take offence at the idea that Jews are collectively and eternally guilty of a crime some of their people committed some 2000 years ago, because I don’t believe in collective, inherited guilt.”

      What exactly do you mean by “some of their people”; IOW, what do you imagine is the relationship between contemporary “jews” and the “jews” of 2000 years ago?

      “My sense of justice is that a person is responsible only for his own behavior, not of that of his kinsmen or ancestors. So I don’t see this pronouncement of the Catholic Church as a kind of ‘heresy.'”

      This discussion is about right vs wrong and/or innocence vs guilt – in a spiritual sense (i.e. as per the Bible) – not as per your highly subjective, worldly “sense of justice.” Maybe an example will drive the point home? Suppose that on the day he would’ve committed his first rape and murder, Ted Bundy had suffered a debilitating stroke and was physically unable to commit the crime. In your view he’d still be a morally upstanding person because his “behavior” was not bad, right?

      But what if the stroke was fatal; what would’ve been Ted Bundy’s spiritual fate?

      The Bible gives us many clues. According to Jesus: “Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery: (28) But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.” (Matthew 5:27,28).

      So it’s clear that from a spiritual perspective Ted Bundy would’ve been guilty because of the evil in his heart, regardless of whether or not he was able to carry out the crime.

      “On the other hand, Jews would be wise to denounce the anti-Christian passages in the Talmud, if they prefer to improve relations with Christians.”

      Seriously? What exactly do you mean by this statement? Are you suggesting that they engage in dishonest rhetoric, i.e. posturing, or are you suggesting a fundamental change in heart – a dramatic change that would essentially make them no longer “jews”?

      1. @ TLOA, Saki, Franklin and Harold Smith:

        Very good discussion concerning morality, personal and collective guilt, and Jews. Saki, I know that quote as well about the slivers and planks in your eye and judgement. TLOA, as a Slavic brother, I agree with you about the brutality toward Russians by JEWS. And yes, the battle we wage is of the heart and Soul, for we battle not against Flesh and Blood but against Rulers, Principalities, Powers and the Dark forces of this world. A spiritual battle indeed and GOOD wins out in the end!

        The Problem as I see it and as most people see it, unless experienced or knowledgeable, is the term JEW. Most people, when you say Jew, just think of any type of Jew ( secular dressed or orthodox/Hasidic dressed) as a person that attends a Synagogue and lives their type of life. To most people this would be considered your good, normal, average Jew that works for a living like you and me. We, here, on the other hand, define JEW, as those types that are Satanists, Occultists, Talmudic, Illuminati, Zionists and AshkeNAZI, Rothschild Bankster agents types that control Global events like Puppetmasters. If we were to mention these characteristics of those JEWS to your common citizen in Amerika, Canada, or Western Europe, that person would look at you as if you are an Alien (no pun intended). This is the problem we here at Darkmoon face and of course it is due to the fact that those Specific Bad JEWS control the MSM, Banking and Politicians, etc., on a Global scale. The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion are working on these Sheeple. Thus, I hate to lump all Jews together as Evil, but that is the only way to get the Sheeple’s attention (my wife included) since the International Jewry psyop has blinded so many sheeple and works so well!

        Sadly, we here are the exception and wish the sheeple would wake up! It is only the TRUTH through learning and teaching ( Alexandre Soltzhenityn) when things will change! Gladly, also in the end GOOD will triumph over Evil. Excuse me, if I use Oompa Lumpa thinking ( lump all Jews as One) to get the point across to common people. To my relief, commenters on Darkmoon are of the Exceptional Variety (discerning Intelligentsia)! All the Best in 2020 and as Tiny Tim said, “GOD” (Allah for some) Bless us Everyone!” Danke and Spassiba!

      2. @Harold Smith

        One is “guilty” of a crime only if one has committed that crime. Having a “bad character” is not the same as having committed a crime. If a person has a bad character but never commits a crime then he is not “guilty” of a crime.

        Christ was executed by the Romans on instigation of a group of Sadducees and a shouting Jewish crowd in the first century AD. All other Jews of that time and after that time were or are not guilty of that act. Whether they had or have otherwise a “bad character” or did or do commit other crimes is another matter, but they were or are not guilty of the execution of Christ.

      3. @ Franklyn Ryckaert

        “One is ‘guilty’ of a crime only if one has committed that crime.”

        You’re putting the cart before the horse. I asked you to explain “the relationship between contemporary ‘jews’ and the ‘jews’ of 2000 years ago” and you ignored my request. Before we can meaningfully discuss the subject you have to explain this.

        “Having a ‘bad character’ is not the same as having committed a crime. If a person has a bad character but never commits a crime then he is not ‘guilty’ of a crime.

        Or so you barely assert from your purely worldly perspective, but from the perspective of the “early Church Fathers” the “crime” in question is a Biblical (spiritual) matter. This is what you don’t seem to understand.

        “Christ was executed by the Romans on instigation of a group of Sadducees and a shouting Jewish crowd in the first century AD. All other Jews of that time and after that time were or are not guilty of that act. Whether they had or have otherwise a ‘bad character’ or did or do commit other crimes is another matter, but they were or are not guilty of the execution of Christ.”

        Jesus said:

        “(29) Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You build tombs for the prophets and decorate the monuments of the righteous. (30) And you say, ‘If we had lived in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partners with them in shedding the blood of the prophets.’ (31) So you testify against yourselves that you are the sons of those who murdered the prophets. (32) Fill up, then, the measure of the sin of your fathers. (33) You snakes! You brood of vipers! How will you escape the sentence of hell?

        (34) Because of this, I am sending you prophets and wise men and teachers. Some of them you will kill and crucify, and others you will flog in your synagogues and persecute in town after town. (35) And so upon you will come all the righteous blood shed on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah son of Berechiah, whom you murdered between the temple and the altar. (36) Truly I tell you, all these things will come upon this generation” (Matthew 23: 29-36).

        So tell me, how could the “scribes and Pharisees” that Jesus was personally addressing here possibly be responsible for “all the righteous blood shed on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah son of Berechiah”?

        Because they were all the embodiment of the spirit of Satan, that’s how. They were spiritually indistinguishable. Referring back to my earlier example: In the eyes of the Lord, Ted Bundy would have been “guilty” of rape and murder in his heart even if a stroke had stopped him from actually physically raping and murdering anyone.

        Now getting back to the case of the “jews.” What did Jesus say to the Pharisees? He said:

        “Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.” (John 8:44)

        That seems clear enough, right? Now all we have to do to figure this out is to establish the relationship between contemporary “jews” and the “jews” of Jesus time (prior to 70 AD).

        And Rabbi Louis Finklestein tells us:

        “Judaism. Pharisaism became Talmudism, Talmudism became Medieval Rabbinism, and Medieval Rabbinism became Modern Rabbinism. But throughout these changes of name, inevitable adaptation of custom, and adjustment of Law, the spirit of the ancient Pharisee survives unaltered.

        When the Jew reads his prayers, he is reciting formulae prepared by pre-Maccabean scholars; when he dons the cloak prescribed for the Day of Atonement and Passover Eve, he is wearing the festival garment of ancient Jerusalem; when he studies the Talmud, he is actually repeating the arguments used in the Palestinian academies.

        Nor is it merely the outer accoutrements of Pharisaism which have survived in his life; the spirit of the doctrine has remained quick and vital.”

        (Rabbi Louis Finkelstein, “The Pharisees, The Sociological Background of Their Faith”; Forward to the First Edition, p.XXi, The Jewish Publication Society of America, 1938).

        So according to Rabbi Finklestein, contemporary jews are the spiritual heirs of the Pharisees; that is, they are the embodiment of the spirit of Satan.

        Thus anyone who self-identifies as a jew – anyone who willingly accepts the Jewish identity – consciously makes a personal declaration of war against truth, love, goodness, order, etc., all of which it seeks to destroy at every opportunity, as evinced by the murder of Jesus.

        I believe this is the sense in which the “early Church Fathers” blame the “jews”

      4. pardon my barging in on this but i feel it may warrant the following comment.

        It may be that the confusion arises out of different first principles, whereby Franklin’s platform is an essentially materialist, deterministic one, so that anyone’s life is a consequence, genetic and otherwise of the universal set of preceding causes and so on, canceling any notion of responsibility inherited at the moment of nativity—a Jew is a Jew because he was born a Jew to Jew parents through no fault of his own and can therefore not be expected to shoulder the blame for previous crimes of Judean legacy.

        Maybe so, maybe not, because according to what i caught from buddhist thought—not much, i only go for the concentrated content, not the encyclopedic breadth, then move on in hurry, a man possessed like the rabbit in Alice in Wonderland—that our birth is a karmic event, like a car that arrived in Tallahassee instead of Muskogee as the driver intended, because he misread the interstate signposts and cannot remember making that mistake.
        A Jew who cannot by huge effort of will—i will grant them that—free himself from that horrific bondage, a version of hell if there ever was one, is destined to repeat, repeat ad nauseam until the satanic spell is broken—if it takes eternity, so be it—two eternities if need be, three!
        This is just a theoretical concept at this time, i don’t stand four-square behind it but as a working hypothesis, it is satisfactory.
        Whether the Christ would give it any credence is a moot question because while His message is universal, the means of delivery is purely local in order to fully engage the bleating flock being shepherded toward the Light, so one sees Injun Virgin of Guadelupe in Mexico or an oriental looking one in Akita, Japan and so on, speaking in local dialect—but dealing with the same subject, always, that of free will, individual responsibility—Randomness, that the most mysterious and precious of God’s gifts, whereby he takes His hands off the steering wheel and lets us find our way to Muskogee on our own.

        Just say No to materialist viewpoint Franklin, it robs you of much more than the ephemeral benefits it bestows on you—if you want to move forward.

      5. @ Lobro

        “It may be that the confusion arises out of different first principles, whereby Franklin’s platform is an essentially materialist, deterministic one, so that anyone’s life is a consequence, genetic and otherwise of the universal set of preceding causes and so on, canceling any notion of responsibility inherited at the moment of nativity—a Jew is a Jew because he was born a Jew to Jew parents through no fault of his own and can therefore not be expected to shoulder the blame for previous crimes of Judean legacy.”

        Great comment Lobo.

        As you impliedly point out, there are actually two separate but related issues here (and Franklyn, from his perspective, can apparently only see one issue).

        Bishop Williamson said:

        “None of the early Church Fathers, who believed devoutly that the Jews were collectively to blame for the death of Christ—the crime of ‘deicide’—would have approved of the Pope’s sudden decision that the Jews were not to blame after all but were spotlessly innocent of the death of Christ.”

        A key word here is “collectively,” IMO. The “early Church Fathers” understood and publicly acknowledged the Satanic nature of the “jewish” *collective.* They understood for example that if Jesus were to return and start “making waves” again, the spiritual heirs of the Pharisees would treat him exactly the same way he was treated by the Pharisees the last time; i.e. they would have to murder him. So in their hearts they are guilty of deicide even if they don’t get the actual chance to physically murder Jesus (just like Ted Bundy would be guilty of rape and murder in his heart even if a stroke prevented him from actually carrying it out (Matthew 5:27,28)).

        The other issue is: What is the moral culpability of an individual jew vis-a-vis that of the Satanic collective?

        I compare the situation to an individual who joins the U.S. military. The U.S. military is no doubt an instrument of Satanic evil, and some people understand this up front and join anyway, whereas some naive others seem to not know any better.

        At some point however many if not most of those naive/ignorant others come to the realization that the organization they belong to is in the business of doing evil, and at that point they must make a moral choice. I see Chelsea Manning as an example of such a person who was confronted and made the proper moral choice. Other examples would be Navy Petty Officer Pablo Paredes and Army Staff Sergeant Camilo Mejia.

        I believe someone born into “Jewishness” is not morally culpable until that person at some level of consciousness understands the situation yet knowingly and willfully makes the moral choice to identify as a jew; at which point he or she acquires “the mark of the beast.”

      6. @Harold Smith

        “…So in their hearts they are guilty of deicide even if they don’t get the actual chance to physically murder Jesus…”

        You don’t understand what guilt is. Guilt is about what you have done, not about what you might do. Punishing people for things you think they might do is not justice, it is applied prejudice.

      7. FR –

        RE:
        “…So in their hearts they are guilty of deicide even if they don’t get the actual chance to physically murder Jesus…”

        This is one of the tenets of many organized religions. That is why I quit them all.

        The Lutheran church believes the thought is as bad as the physical act….. because the process is thoughts, words and deeds in that order. Without the thoughts, no deeds.

        The Baptist President Jimmy Carter asked for forgiveness for his lustful thoughts….. he thought he had sinned.

        It is all like voodoo mumbo-jumbo to me….. to take money from poor folks and give to the wealthy leaders globally!!

      8. @ Pat
        @ Franklin Ryckaert

        I’m afraid you are a moral illiterate if you think it is NOT a sin to lust after a 3-year-old girl in secret, but only becomes a sin if you do something about it.

        Is this what you feel you can do with a clear conscience? It’s OK to have filthy fantasies of lust and murder, is it? But it only becomes a real sin if you turn these vile thoughts into deeds? You and Franklin Rickaert belong in psychiatric institutions. You are both SICK.

        I won’t accuse you and Ryckaert of being “Jewish” for the simple reason that I don’t need to, given that degenerate goyim like you are far more toxic than many Jews I know. Baseness of character is not a Jewish monopoly.

      9. Franklin,

        Guilt is about what you have done, not about what you might do.

        goes back to my remark, caught by Harold.
        to you, guilt is defined as an act designated as illegal, whether criminal or civil and subject to prescribed penalty, where the accused has right to be represented by solicitors and barristers (woe to you scribes, Pharisees, hypocrites!) versed in technical intricacies of law (originally and to an extent presently, YHWH’s Law) and judged by another designated scribe, since the ordinary citizens cannot be judges given that they (goyim, mostly) understand the concept of guilt and justice differently.
        in other words, the standoff between the secular/materialist and sacred/spiritual/Logos continues.

        this presents difficulties for a materialist, an example or two:
        • if someone fantasizes about raping and killing children, three years plus a day, is he guilty or not?
        • if not, let’s ramp it up a bit, what if he spends time in front of the computer screen perusing porn sites depicting these very activities—guilty or not?
        • if not, then, if he pays big money to watch snuff movies—guilty or not? (oh yes, because the Mighty Law prohibits it)

        and this presents the dilemma in clear terms, because to a spiritual being, aware that the universe (God) watches and judges every single movement subject to free will, i.e., individual responsibility, including thoughts, the guilt is established right off the bat in the first cited instance, whereas to a materialist/atheist, it only comes into play at the third (maybe second) instance—but that essentially means that if the perpetrator is not caught, he cannot be guilty, in other words,

        anything goes, just don’t get caught!

        and this goes to the very black heart of Judaism and why Jesus was sent as a warning to us, why His Testament has nothing to do with Torah (the Old Testament—even though I object to both documents sharing the term “Testament”, let one bear it and choose another for the other because they stand in the most polar opposition imaginable—why can’t people see it, another unbelievable success of Jew’s psycho-engineering prowess).

        NB: i know perfectly well that you are not a Jew and even if you were, i would stand up for your right to speak, so long as you clearly and honestly delineate your basic premises and proceed to build upon them, construct your claims, arguments and proofs in an informed, logical manner—therefore i welcome your statements above because they help me not so much “win” the debate (totally irrelevant) as clarify issues in my own mind.
        Cheers!

      10. @ Lobro (re Franklin Ryckaert) :

        You have clearly expressed my thoughts. Ten times better than I could have done myself.

        Thought IS a crime, despite Franklin’s argument to the contrary. How would he like a perv to babysit his daughter and jerk off her in secret? He is arguing that as long as the child is not harmed in any way, or even aware of the perv’s fantasies, the perv is not guilty of any crime.

        I am arguing, as you are, that the perv is definitely guilty of a serious MORTAL SIN, though not of a legally indictable crime.

        You will note that Franklin made no attempt to answer’s Saki’s brilliant post in which Saki argued convincingly that Sarah Silverman was AS GUILTY of deicide as the Jews who had been present at Christ’s crucifixion. This is what Saki said and no one has picked up on it but me:

        SAKI to Franklin Ryckaert:

        And what think of then you of this vile, gloating comment by Sarah Silverman: “I hope the Jews did kill Christ! I’d fucking do it again in a second!”

        https://i.4pcdn.org/pol/1478754153997.png

        You’d give this evil Jewess a clean bill of health, would you?

        Well, I don’t! As far as I’m concerned, she is AS guilty of deicide as Caiaphas and his gang of gruesome miscreants.

        Stick up for the good Jews by all means, Franklin. That does you credit. But if you persist in acting as an apologist for the bad Jews too, for the most malevolent and psychopathic Jews alive today, you will lose all credibility.

        That is well said, in my opinion. For Franklin to give Sarah Silverman a clean bill of health is as morally perverted as giving the perv who masturbates in secret over his underage daughter a clean bill of health. In fact, Franklinn’s attitude beggars belief. It’s as if he has no moral compass whatsoever.

      11. @Pete

        The argument is not that bad fantasies are alright, the argument is that fantasies are not the same as acts. Besides, only clairvoyants can know what thoughts or fantasies others have. It is not our business to punish others for the thoughts we ascribe to them.

      12. FR –
        HS –
        Pete –
        Lobro –
        ALL reading this –

        Resist the jews’ ‘thought crimes’ and ‘hate crimes’ with all your might. Orwell warned us.

        There can be NO guilt lawfully ruled in a non-jew court of law when there is NO injured party!! Thoughts produce NO injured parties.

        Thinking about destroying a synagogue should not be enough to land anyone in jail. BUT – it will be charged against many in the future just on that belief. They are talking about it in NY right now!!

        Suspect in Monsey Stabbings Searched Online for ‘Hitler,’ Charges Say
        Officials said the suspect, who is charged with hate crimes, also expressed anti-Semitic views in his journal.

        ….details emerged as federal prosecutors filed ****hate crime charges**** on Monday against the man accused of stabbing five Jewish people at a Hanukkah celebration over the weekend in the New York suburbs.

        In recent weeks, the criminal complaint said, the man, Grafton E. Thomas, had also searched for “German Jewish Temples near me,” and “Zionist Temples” in Elizabeth, N.J., and in Staten Island.

        The attack on Saturday at the home of a rabbi, coming after a slew of recent anti-Semitic incidents, has rattled the region’s Jewish population. The authorities have boosted police patrols in ultra-Orthodox neighborhoods and bolstered security at area synagogues and yeshivas.

        https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/30/nyregion/jewish-attacks.html

      13. @Pete, Lobro et alii

        You are mixing up categories, which are :

        1) Thoughts, fantasies and emotions.
        2) Words (spoken or written).
        3) Actions.

        You can have good or bad in all 3 categories – and I don’t condone the bad ones – but you should not mix up the categories. A bad thought (which I don’t condone) is not the same as a bad deed, nor are bad words (which I don’t condone either) the same as bad deeds. If Sarah Silverman says that she would crucify Christ, which are bad words, then that is not the same as the act of crucifying. Why is this simple truth so difficult to understand? We can condemn bad thoughts or bad words, but their effects are far less bad than bad actions. Bad thoughts are for the most part not even known by others.

      14. @ Franklin Ryckaert

        If Sarah Silverman says that she would crucify Christ, which are bad words, then that is not the same as the act of crucifying. Why is this simple truth so difficult to understand?

        I understand what you are saying, Franklin. Loud and clear. I don’t need to be told that a bad deed is worse than a bad thought. I don’t need to be told that a murder is worse than a contemplated murder. I am also aware, as most people are, that murder is a more serious crime that manslaughter. This is because manslaughter is seen as killing without the intent to kill, or killing by a person seen as mentally unfit or suffering from a serious personality disorder beyond control.

        So far, so good. We are in agreement!

        However, your argument that Sarah Silverman’s consent to deicide in the 20th century is not culpable deicide because she didn’t have a personal hand in crucifying Christ, is casuistical, jesuitical, and logically untenable according to your own criteria.

        Let me explain why you are a wrong; this is a last-ditch attempt to appeal to your sense of intellectual integrity.

        You have already admitted that all those Jews who clamoured for the death of Christ at the actual crucifixion scene, in support of the High Priest Caiaphas — with their cries of “Crucify him, crucify him!” and later with “His blood be on us and on our children!” — are guilty of deicide.

        At the same time, you are maintaining that Sarah Silverman however, because she wasn’t there, is NOT GUILTY of deicide.

        But what, pray tell, is the difference? The Jews who were there did not actually hammer the nails into Christ. They were not physically involved in the crucifixion. They were enthusiastic spectators only. That’s all. Do you mean to tell me that Sarah Silverman is NOT guilty of deicide simply because she is IN A DIFFERENT TIME ZONE? She too, like the Jews present at the actual crucifixion, did not have a personal hand in the crucifixion and was merely a passive collaborator in a different time and place.

        She too, surely, is guilty of deicide as a willing collaborator, as an enthusiastic cheerleader from another century. She is no different from that Jewish rabble you are prepared to pronounce guilty of deicide.

        It seems to me you are making too many excuses for the Jews, Franklin. The Jews themselves, if strictly logical, would reject your arguments as contrary to common sense. Reflect that they are still claiming Holocaust reparations from Germany for an alleged event that took place over 70 years ago. And bear in mind, too, that most Germans living today did not burn 6 million Jews in imaginary gas ovens. So why are they being strong-armed into paying these exorbitant reparations for the alleged crimes of their ancestors?

        Surely it is time for the state of Israel and the Jewish diaspora (a) to start refunding to Germany and Switzerland the billions of dollars they have received in reparations for a Holocaust that never took place; and (b) surely it is time for all Jews, worldwide, to start paying compensation to Christian nations for the crime of deicide.

        The Jews should not get be able to away with murdering Jesus Christ, the founder of the Christian religion. If Jews can claim cash for the Holocaust, why can’t Christians claim cash for the cosmic crime of deicide? It’s never too late.

      15. @ Franklyn Ryckaert

        “You are mixing up categories, which are :

        1) Thoughts, fantasies and emotions.
        2) Words (spoken or written).
        3) Actions.

        You can have good or bad in all 3 categories – and I don’t condone the bad ones – but you should not mix up the categories. A bad thought (which I don’t condone) is not the same as a bad deed, nor are bad words (which I don’t condone either) the same as bad deeds.”

        What you personally condone or don’t condone, is irrelevant.

        Jesus said: “Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery: (28) But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.” (Matthew 5:27,28).

        So you, Franklyn Ryckaert the atheist, come to a Christian web site, Darkmoon, and in comments on an article dealing with spiritual matters involving the Catholic church (subject matter which you really have no standing to critique in the first place), you take issue with the unambiguously clear words spoken by Jesus? And then you expect to be taken seriously?

      16. Harold
        It can’t be said with certainty what exactly Jesus said alluding to committing adultery in your heart. It seems to me that one can only do that from elsewhere, not in your heart. Similar to when Jimmy Carter said he lusted after a woman in his heart. It seems to me that you can only DO that from your loins. Besides, the confounding human brain is capable of ANYTHING as it stems from the imagination

      17. @ Brownhawk

        “It can’t be said with certainty what exactly Jesus said alluding to committing adultery in your heart.”

        Seriously? Jesus made the subject statement (Matthew 5:27,28) during the Sermon on the Mount. And it was immediately followed by:

        “(29) And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.”

        So it seems quite clear to me what Jesus was getting at. But you disagree. The simplest reply to your statement would be to ask you: Then why did Jesus say it, especially in the context of a sermon to the masses, if it is do difficult or impossible to understand? Just to confuse the audience?

        “It seems to me that one can only do that from elsewhere, not in your heart.”

        Well it seems to me that you’re just being contrary; not only are you ignoring the rest of the Bible but basically standing the whole concept of Christianity on it’s head.

        “(16) These six things doth the Lord hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him:
        (17) A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood,
        (18) AN HEART THAT DEVISETH WICKED IMAGINATIONS, feet that be swift in running to mischief,
        (19) A false witness that speaketh lies, and he that soweth discord among brethren.” (Proverbs 6:16-19)

      18. @ Harold Smith

        “…That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart…” (Matthew 5:27,28).

        “In his heart”…so in his imagination, not in his deed, exactly what I also say.

      19. @ Franklyn Ryckaert

        So now you’re going to claim that in these verses Jesus is actually giving his moral imprimatur to sexual lust; as long as a person doesn’t (or can’t) carry it out for some reason, it’s okay with him? Seriously?

        If that’s the case, why does Jesus say in the following verse:

        “(29) And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.”

        Why would he use the example of plucking your eye out to avoid being “cast into hell”? You don’t rape someone with your eye, right? Obviously Jesus mentions the eye because you generally lust after what you SEE.

        I don’t think I’m going to waste anymore time arguing absurdities with you.

      20. @Saki

        The difference between that Jewish crowd and Sarah Silverman is not “merely a different time zone”, it is the difference between a crime that could be committed and a crime that cannot be committed and therefore doesn’t exist. Besides, Sarah Silverman is a comedian. Her words were not meant in earnest but “for fun”. I don’t like her kind of provocative “fun”, but that is what they are.

      21. @ Franklin Ryckaert

        Pathetic. I agree with Saki. Every word he (or she) has said rings true. I also agree with Harold Smith who reinforces everything said by Saki. You are simply not worth arguing with, Mr Ryckaert. If you cannot see that both Saki and Harold Smith have made mincemeat of all your arguments, you are either morally obtuse or have a serious blind spot.

        If you think it’s absolutely fine to lust after a woman — no “crime” at all in your cretinous legalistic rule book — then it’s no crime either for a pedophile to babysit your 3-year-old daughter (if you had one) and lust after the little child. You would condone that, would you? Would you sit there complacently and smile as this pervert masturbated over your 3-year-old daughter?

        Apparently, you would. You wouldn’t mind this at all. After all, he is not raping your daughter. He is not laying his hands on her. He is not ruffling her little curls.

        There’s only one word for you, Mr Ryckaert. I won’t say it. I have been contaminated enough simply by entering into communicate with you. You were the same man, if I remember correctly, who recently said on this site that the Holocaust had occurred, citing Jewish Wikipedia as your source of “reliable” information. That says it all.

        Nuff said.

      22. HS
        You conveniently disregard what I’m saying and dismissively conclude that I am merely being a contrarian for its own sake. Apparently you are unaware of the ad hominem aspect this entails.

        For all right thinking people, is the Sermon on the Mount an event deserving of being sanctified? Certainly. If the doctrinal wording in certain areas of the Lord’s Prayer claiming to represent the speaker does not support that, is it worthy of that distinction? Certainly not.

        You, as with many Christians demonstrate sound reasoning in most instances. But when it comes to the subject of Biblical doctrine all of that goes out the window. Determining this requires a simple understanding of probability to ascertain that much can be lost in translation between what Jesus WOULD have said in reflecting a man of the highest moral authority and what he is alleged to have said that DOESN’T reflect that. That this simple mode of logic is missing is stunning, although certainly easy to understand given the general state of indoctrination that’s been imbued for 2,000 years.

        Jesus taught that Creation is love manifested, whose Grace dwells in the heart of Man and is sanctioned autonomously, without doctrine that claims to represent its truth by presenting a false posture of authority

        Read Matthew 6:12,14-15 carefully and tell me these are the words of a man who exemplifies personal accountability and integrity. Why would he say that which contradicts this by deferring this to a phantasmagorical understanding of God? Or formulate a prayer that endorses irresponsibility and instills fear? Why would he say that which conveys a relinquishment of the primary moral component of man’s personal sovereignty?

        The logic in all this is irrefutable IF is to reflect Jesus as a man occupying the highest moral station and IF we are to rely on written doctrine to properly represent that

      23. @ Brownhawk

        What’s the difference between a physically “healthy” person who is able to control himself and satisfies himself sexually by intimacy with his wife, for example, and a physically “healthy” person e.g., Gary Ridgway (the so-called “Green River killer” rapist/murderer), who even though he was married was not able to control himself and apparently wanted to attack every attractive woman he saw?

        What’s the difference between a “poor” person who struggles to live within his meager means and yet still deals with other people honestly, and a similarly situated “poor” person who decides that rather than work hard to survive he’s going to support himself and perhaps elevate his quality of life – by robbing his neighbors?

        The difference between these people would not be found in their sex organs of their empty wallets (as you seem to be implying) but in their “hearts,” right? What else would you have expected Jesus to say in this case during a sermon addressing masses of common people? Jesus was obviously using the word “heart” metaphorically, as a measure of a person’s moral competency or righteousness in the eyes of God (as it is similarly used perhaps hundreds of times elsewhere in the Bible).

        So how was I to supposed to construe your comment? You’re not intelligent enough to understand Jesus’ use of the word “heart” in the obvious context in which he used it? Or you’re upset because there were no quotation marks around the word? Or you’re just being contrary?

        With these choices, I picked the latter. Sorry if you were offended. Where I apparently went wrong was bothering to respond to your comment at all.

      24. HS
        The point to be made regarding my observation went completely over your head. It pertains to the inadequacy of Biblical doctrine as reflected by wording which fails to assign authority to where it properly belongs – with the individual and not the Pharisees. Instead, in your arrogance you resort to saying I’m not intelligent enough to understand what should be seen by readers to be your superior intellect.

        What a pompous ass you are.

      25. @ Brownhawk

        One of the reasons I check in on the Darkmoon site regularly is to read what Harold Smith has to say on current affairs. His comments strike me as well-informed as they are lucid. He does not sound “pompous” to me at all.

        On the other hand, your own posts are the ones I generally skip. This is because your style is obscurantist and verbose. It lacks clarity. You are not in a position to assume airs of superiority to a man who has had several hard-hitting articles published on this website.

        I’d advise you to pipe down and stop trying to con people into thinking you are some kind of guru with a hotline to God.

      26. @ Brownhawk

        “The point to be made regarding my observation went completely over your head. It pertains to the inadequacy of Biblical doctrine as reflected by wording which fails to assign authority to where it properly belongs – with the individual and not the Pharisees.”

        Since your “point” (if you’ve finally decided what it was) had nothing whatsoever to do with anything relevant to that part of the discussion that you involved yourself in; yes, it did go “over [my] head.”

        “Instead, in your arrogance you resort to saying I’m not intelligent enough to understand what should be seen by readers to be your superior intellect.”

        Well in my “arrogance,” that’s not what I said at all. I concluded that you were apparently just being contrary. I’m sorry that my plain language statement went over your head.

        “What a pompous ass you are.”

        If makes you feel better to call me names, knock your socks off. But could you do me one small favor? Would you mind not responding to any of my comments unless you have something meaningful to say? Thanks in advance.

      27. Silent Reader

        Since you’ve decided to grace us with your dubious presence I suggest you do so using a new moniker, otherwise stay true to the one you use and stay…..silent🤫

      28. Nicely put, Brownhawk! You are not pompous at all, it seems, not deep down. It is just your facade. Deep down, you are a very vulnerable person who needs reassurance. And possibly a hug. Let me assure you of my continued good will, and I do appreciate it when you suddenly burst into poetry. You have given me and my fellow inmates in this establishment quite a few chuckles.

      29. SR
        We’re all vulnerable in need of reassurance. No need to single me out in that regard. Our faith is being tested every day, the severity of which will only increase as we hurtle through this illusion of “time”, the great enabler of Evil.

        Xanadu or the Abyss. The choice is yours and yours alone

        Wahi-kalu Pa-u-ki💗

    3. This is a mixed-up understanding of the matter. Early Christians were “Jews” in the way you are using the terminology (“Jew”) here. And those “Jews” (the early Christians) were not saying all “Jews were collectively to blame for the death of Christ”. The Jews who did not accept Jesus as Messiah are the ones who killed Christ. Those who rejected Jesus as Messiah were saying, “Let his [the Messiah’s] blood be on us and on our children.”

      An analogy would be to say that white Americans enslaved Black Africans in America. If it were still the case that Americans today had a system of chattel slavery in which black Africans fell into the category of inherently being a chattel slave (which ended up being implicitly the case – if not absolutely the case in a strictly legal sense), then Americans would still be responsible for being slavers to Black Africans in America. There is no chattel slavery in America anymore so any such point is moot. Jews, on the the hand, did not accept Jesus as Messiah and still don’t – as a matter of course.

      1. 12/16/66 = birthdate.

        But maybe that is fortuitous in that I’m not impressed with the spiritual worldviews of the ancients and might as well have numbers that could be read as significant to such views.

        The Christian/Jewish divide is internal division between members of an ancient worldview which are better left ignored.

        BTW, the Star Wars story is a very similar one to the Christian one. Anakin Skywalker was “the Chosen One” – not born of man’s seed but created through “the Force”. He became a messiah by eliminating the Sith dark side of the force – in killing the Sith lord and dying himself (as apprentice next in line to that system).

        Disney screwed that up in the sequels by having it that Darth Vader seems to have not eliminated the Sith lord (and therefore the imbalance of the Force) after all! I suppose Disney will end up doing the same for Christianity. A sort of, meh, Christ’s death didn’t actually do anything in that spiritual worldview after all! lol.

    4. Franklin Ryckaert:

      The church Fathers did not think of the jews as a race, but as followers of the jewish ‘religion’. Many jews converted to Christianity, others persisted in the pharisaic talmudic religion. Nobody has to be a jew, you see. There is no jewish race, but there is still a jewish ‘religion’.

      1. MTC –

        “There is no jewish race, but there is still a jewish ‘religion’.”

        I believe that. There are many racial types who consider themselves to be jews.

        Paul Newman, William Shatner, Bernie Sanders, Neil Diamond, Lucile Ball, Eddie Cantor, Rodney Dangerfield, Buddy Hackett, Leonard Nimoy, Charles Bronson and General Wesley Clark ALL claimed to be jews and are/were of different racial stock.

  3. I learned first as he was introduced , that the honest Bishop was imprisoned for blasphemy of the true god , that has devoured both protestant and ROman Catholic, the holycost.

    Is this last of the faithful still in prison ; did he refuse to repent like john the Baptizer or has he been chastised and freed?

  4. @ HP

    Can not get your video on Jutube in Canada!

    What topics to end 2019 on: Shakespeare, Love, Sin and Apostate Religion. However, the greatest Truth is that Jesus Christ, with his teachings founded a Church, that did NOT need a Building. Where 2 -3 gather in my name (Jesus), there am I and so is GOD. Only Man and our Controllers require Buildings to show their Power and Might over us and turn us all into Sheeple. Man is a physical entity, GOD is SPIRITUAL and resides in our SOUL through our Heart. Babylonian Mysticism and hence Talmudism, and those that practice it (Satanists) have been trying to separate US from that truth: Jesus, GOD and the Soul, from the dawn of time!

    Now just as an example of Jewish (Hebrew / Pharisaical) trickery, look at the story of the Judaic/Hebrew/Israelite Babylonian Captivity. Most scholars would agree that the prophet Daniel was the only one that remained true to the old Yahwah/Jehovah/Elohim version of GOD. All the other young Hebrew captives took on Babylonian Mysticism because they ate/drank, etc the Babylonian Philosophies/Mysteries, which were then taken on by the Pharisees/Sanhedrin to form the Talmud. So, just like Jewry convinced the Roman Catholic Church to not blame Jews, but Romans for the Crucifixion of Christ, Jewry (Hebrews) used an old Jewish (Jedi) Mind trick to convince themselves and us that they defeated the Babylonian Empire. Thus, other than Daniel (true prophet), captured Hebrews enjoyed themselves in Babylon like hedonists, but used their psychology (mind powers) and connections (like a Mafia) to convince the Babylonians to let them go! (Insert: Moses – Let my people go (Charleton Heston speech!)) It only took them 70 years to do it! Ha Ha Ha! Talk about International Jewry Arrogance and Pride!

    Next, the problems of the Universal Church (Roman Catholic) started even before it was centred in Rome (Vatican). Through the Babylonian Mysticism (Mystery Babylon, Great Harlot), in Christ’s time, practised by Hebrews/JEWS (the Talmud), there was a Jewish Sorcerer, named Simon the Sorcerer (not the Simon Peter – fisherman, Pope’s Fisherman’s Ring) that wanted to buy the Devine/Holy Spirit power of the Apostles/Disciples. Typical Jew, Simon the Sorcerer. Now because of the similarity in name between fisherman Simon Peter and Simon the Sorcerer, the Sorcerer used this to his advantage and went to Rome (not Simon Peter) to start the Universal Church on top of a Cemetery. The real Simon Peter only made it to Anatolia (Turkey) where he was tried under Roman law and hung upside down because he felt unworthy to die as Christ died. Then through GOD’s sense of humour, it was a former Rabbi, SAUL, renamed PAUL, because of his Damascus Road experience, that spread Christianity to Rome and was eventually adopted as the state religion. In my own case, I am named after a famous bishop/cardinal, Norbertus, who as a young wealthy man, had a similar Damascus Road experience on a horse, that caused him to question and change his ways!

    Thus Bishop Williamson is right, but really does NOT go back far enough. And yes Pope Francis is the current False Prophet and probably the final One, as he gathers up all his False Religion offspring under his, Mystery Babylon, Great Harlot bossom!

    PS: If you check on the history of St. Francis of Assisi, Pope Francis’ namesake, you find a pious man that loved animals, but what is forgotten is that St. Francis also had dreams of an Apocolypse / Endtime Catastrophies. That is the secret of Pope Francis’ name. And of course to boot, he is a Jesuit (Jews U it). Ignatius Loyola and Adam Weishaupt being famous founder and members, who were crypto-Jews. That says it all!

    1. “Anyone can adopt this simple method. There is no expenditure, there is no tax, nor is there any need to build a very big church or temple. Anyone, anywhere, can sit down on the road or beneath a tree and chant the Hare Krishna mantra and worship God.”
      (Srila Prabhupada)

      Or chant/pray the Rosary or chant/sing Nasheeds, etc.

    2. @ Blake121666:
      @Lobro:

      Thank you for relaying the Star Wars Anakin story, for I told the gang here that same Anakin / Jesus/ Chosen One analogy for I spotted it years ago, but some Commenters ridiculed me for it. The wisdom you impart is worthy enough to stay on this site with those of us who are the usual suspects regarding commentary and wisdom! Jews are masters at propaganda, even if it is presented as entertainment! Much Thanks!

      As for Lobro, I thank you for your stance on Christianity and your support for the Truth of Jesus Christ, especially in light of the ignorance of Atheists and Muslims alike. I will allow the likes of them to state their views, which is their right and I allow them the courtesy, but for me, just as Jesus Christ is most important to me, so is Logic (Logos = Word) and reasoning and seeking the Truth. And as Alexandre Solzhenitsyn said Truth will lead to victory over the enemy, be it Jews or Satan himself!

      Overall, this discussion about Bishop Williamson and his statement about the Vatican (Church of Rome), has been very entertaining at least and very educational/informative at most. Such reasons are more than noteworthy enough to stay here on a regular basis and encourage the newer commenters to stay. So lets all enjoy 2020 as much as we can before the SHTF!

  5. WOW! THis is a SHOCK!

    Who could’ve POSSISBLY have guessed that Pope APOSTATE I is in league with the Synagogue Of Satan?? ?

  6. The English bishop has in the past endorsed conspiracy theories which allege that the September 2001 attacks were orchestrated by the US authorities.

    Bishop Williamson also publicly denied the Holocaust and criticized the Pope for absolving the Jews of the killing of Jesus, peace be upon him. As a Muslim, I don’t believe Jesus was crucified, but it appeared to Roman (with God’s will) that the person who portrayed Jesus (a Jew) to look like Jesus. So, God raised Jesus to Heavens where he is still alive. In other words, Jesus was neither killed or crucified. It was someone else who was put on the cross. This may differ than the Bible version of how Jesus (pbuh) died.

    If you disagree with me about how Jesus (pbuh) died, , please do not resort to name calling, but rather tell me why you disagree.

    1. MEY –

      It appears there are as many versions of the bible as there are people who have read it or heard the rumors about it.

      I never knew of your version until now. That is fantastic!!

      I was, just today, criticized by NBTT for posting my guesses about the NT here. They were far less controversial than yours!!

      You wanted no name calling, so please don’t call me a “snake” or an “idiot” this time. 🙂

      1. Okay Pat! You get a deal about naming calling. Even though I have THE REALIST in mind when I said it and not you. After all, name calling is a sign of intellectual disability.

      2. Know more about Christianity GOOGLE Ajit Vadakayil Christianity. Valuable information for History of Christianity and its creators.

    2. You can kill the body
      But not the soul
      A simple faith
      For man to know

      Lingering doubt
      is cast aside
      at shepherd’s watch
      trust bonafide

      Tis there to see
      Apostles creed
      Beyond all reason
      It doth supersede

      The workd’s illusion
      A wisp of time
      holds no bearing
      To truth sublime

      A witness

      1. Brilliant! Big Chief Brownhawk strikes again!
        I love your staccato-like verse. Keep it up! 🙂

      2. Thanks, Madame

        You gotta love how the muses interact with us. Those mysterious and inspiring
        daughters of Zeus. That they ARE daughters would seem to imply a commonality where, eg, the sisters Music and Poetry collaborate. For me, the words I put in staccato fashion just come. Thank you sisters.

        But what’s interesting to note is that I feel a more fluid style within me, but I have yet to develop the use of words that would FIT the style. For this I suspect the sister Dance would have to be involved

        If and when I do
        I will have broken through! 😆

    3. I totally disagree with your theory because i know it is not true and i have had arguments with Muslims before, because they relegate the Son of God to the role of a prophet. The most glaring anomaly is the way that Muhammad allegedly met with God as the angel of light that appeared to him and announced that he was the Archangel Gabriel but then announced “I am the Lord your God ” he then said I made mankind from clots of blood, so you see the Lord of Hosts made the angel of light ie Lucifer lie in such a blatant way so that no right thinking person could be duped. Of course you cannot get a Muslim to see the truth in this instance in other words you can lead a horse to water but you can’t make him drink. God Bless J

  7. Islam Guide.com says, “Muslims believe that Jesus was not crucified. It was the plan of Jesus’ enemies to crucify him, but God saved him and raised him up to Him. And the likeness of Jesus was put over another man. Jesus’ enemies took this man and crucified him, thinking that he was Jesus.

    Glad, you like my comment. Actually I chose to stick around here upon the request of Uncle Toby. He did urge me not to leave this site after I was repeatedly attacked personally. Well, as the saying goes, ” if you want to sleep between the graves, you will surely see nightmares.”

    1. MEY –

      I read that the man was taken from the cross and was buried but was gone after three days because “he ascended into heaven to sit at the right hand of GOD, the father.” The Apostles’ Creed, which I recited thousands of times, and Nicene Creed must be lies, according to what you claim.

      1. I basically reject the Nicean creed but not the Apostle’s primarily because of this expansion – “I believe in one God”

        Now don’t get me wrong. This statement in and of itself isn’t the problem I have with it. Rather, to me it opens up a Pandora’s box of misapprehension with its use of the word “God”, as reflected by what I see in certain passages in the book of Matthew, for example.

        To God: Forgive us our trespasses as we would forgive those who trespass against us

        From Jesus: For if you forgive others for their trespasses your father will also forgive you. But if you DON’T forgive them for their trespasses neither will your father forgive YOUR trespasses

        To entreaty another (“God) to forgive our trespasses absolves US from fully engaging our conscience to demonstrate the personal accountability and responsibility that PREVENTS us from trespassing. To forgive OTHERS for trespassing against us absolves THEM from doing the same. The Scriptural wording then has Jesus showing support for others to NOT be held accountable for their actions, and then has him putting the fear of God into those who don’t honor this.

        I say these passages convey what in essence reflects the Kol Nidre, which offers up what has become a liturgical presentation in reflecting what delivers to the listener rites of atonement and absolution to reflect what IN ESSENCE contributes to the Satanic credo of “do what thou will shall be the whole of the law”. I am not saying that this was the intention of ALL of those responsible for the presence of this particular wording What I AM saying is that unintentionally or not, this is what’s being conveyed, whose influence for the last 2,000 years may have been vastly underestimated

        These are not the exact words uttered by a Jesus that ANY rightful thinking Christian would find acceptable

    2. MEY,

      I don’t know where this rumor came from but there are some inconsistencies in it. We are all guessing and assuming some writers are right or wrong. To test our assumptions we have to take all individual pieces and try to assemble the puzzle, if the pieces of the puzzle don’t fit each other some assumptions must be wrong, the model cannot have internal contradictions because they prove the model is wrong. However, if the puzzle is perfectly assembled have we finally got to the truth? Nope, we would have a potential solution, which is better than no solution at all.

      It is difficult to talk about Jesus because there are many myths surrounding his History, thanks the Jews for that! But there is a similar History that I would like to compare, the History of Socrates, Plato’s teacher. Socrates came from a humble family, his father was an artisan and his mother a birth attendant. Plato was from the aristocracy. Socrates didn’t write anything, if he did it was burnt in the Alexandria Library fire, a sad day for mankind.

      Socrates opposed the skepticism and relativism of the Sophists, the previous philosophical school. He believed a universal and stable knowledge, and if one knows the truth one would never choose evil instead of good. A rigged trial was set against him and he was convicted to death, for the crime of corrupting the youth and inventing new Gods.

      In a not so distant past, honor was crucial to the individual, if he was dishonored he would end up at the same level of a street dog. Socrates had all the opportunities to scape his prison. Even those who convicted him facilitated his scape, knowing they had convicted an honorable – though inconvenient – man to death. Socrates sad no and faced his conviction with honor and serenity, he drank the poison himself. Their enemies suffered a backlash after his death. Sound familiar?

      To the point now: how could Jesus, the guy who brought shock waves to civilization, a person quite more relevant than Socrates, be a coward in the face of death and worse, put someone in his suffering place in the cross? Don’t tell me he didn’t know what was coming, he knew perfect well. Everyone can see flashes of his own future, in some dreams or dejavu, just take care of your own eye of Horus, inside your head. I guess time travel is possible because information, something intangible, can travel from the future to the present. To say Jesus tried to escape his conviction putting another guy to suffer his penalty is just a wrong assumption, it doesn’t fit the whole picture.

      P.S. My reference about Socrates is an old History book by Edward McNall Burns – ‘Western Civilizations – Their History and Their Culture’

      1. NBTT,

        An excellent comment all round. Toejamicus should note that Socrates, like Jesus, didn’t feel the need to write down his teachings in books for circulation. All his teachings were transmitted orally, or by word of mouth, just lie the teachings of Jesus Christ. Maybe Plato took lecture notes and jotted down everything Socrates said in Greek shorthand or speedwriting.

        Scholars in those days developed phenomenal memories and could memorise (or”memorize”) entire books by heart, in the same way that Mozart could remember every note of a long symphony played to him only once, and then write it all down in musical notation straight away! There have been thousands of people who have memorised the entire New Testament, word for word, or the entire Qur’an. The Upanishads and the Bhagavad-Gita have been learned by heart by countless Indians over the centuries.

      2. @ NBTT:
        Excellent comment! If only, the TRUTH and nothing but the TRUTH were spoken here! We would all be better for it! As for Free Speech: it is still free, although sometimes the comments are cheap or even worthless, but those people are entitled to speak their mind – for now! The Jewish Cabal will have something to say about it!

      3. It was in January 2016 when Pat started predicting the November 2016 presidential election results — 10 months ahead of the actual election and actual election results, lol. I can’t wait until he starts predicting the November 2020 presidential election results. He’s going to start-up his presidential election predictions in a few days, I just know it! 🙂

    1. Wiggins –

      It certainly IS. 🙂
      When I first read that book, I was ready to abandon my WASPishness. The nobility of England were no more than pirates with a writ to steal from The Church. Before the “Reformation”, the Catholic priors and priories kept the common folk organized and away from starvation. The plundering of the Catholic Church changed all that…
      (I believe the author’s name is “Corbitt”…?)

  8. from the earth we created you,and into it we will return you, and from it we will extract you another time . holy Quran ch.20 verse 55.

    from this verse we can be sure that every human being must die on Earth and never any where else,like the moon or mars or jupiter for example .

    We can also say for sure that Jesus peace be upon him , PBUH , will come back to Earth to die therein like every human being after fullfilling his mission , and that now he is in heaven and alive but wirhout being subjected to the effects of time,ie,he is still 33 years old .

    Jesus,PBUH,knew the Romans were coming after him so he asked his companions saying,which one of you volunteers to be trasformed to look like me and I will guaratnee that he will be with me in heaven . One of his companions agreed,Jesus then was lifted to heaven and the soldiers crusified what appeared to them as Jesus.

    And finally, on the authority of the above Quranic verse alone , we live in a closed earth under a perfect dome and no one can go through it . and therefore the moon landing was impossible to happen and was a big hoax . If the landing did happen , then the Quran would be wrong and that’s impossible .

  9. I think the bishop is a good person and naive as many real christians are. ‘ christianity’ has always been a jewish invention and it is difficult to solve the biggest problem in the world as the real christians are in a double bind by ‘ christianity’. It is a devilish invention a communist jewish manifesto in a lighter form. Why should we honor a jewish ‘ god’?????

  10. @ Mahmoud:

    As long as you do Not become a Wahhabi Muslim or Muslim Extremist ISIS/ ISIL / Daesh fighter backed by IsraHell, I will still consider you a Middle-of-the-Road Muslim, who is welcome to state your views, even if I do NOT always agree with them. This is especially true concerning Jesus, who is much more than just a prophet!
    El Hamdillallah: Eh Salam aley Kum, eh Kum a Salam! And Middle Eastern Christians say to you: Allah. But in their Allah, they mean GOD! Happy New Year and the Best for 2020!

    And we all thank ADMIN Toby!

    1. STORMIN, “Middle-of-the-Road Muslim? Where did you come up this phrase? Never heard of it. To me, if you are Christians, it make no difference if you are a Catholic or Protestant. And if you happened to be an Ashkanazi or Sephardic Jews, you are still a Jew in my eyes .

      I can describe the terror group, ISIS with only two words: Pure evil. This organization is repugnant and anything but Islamic. Its members engaged in sadistic acts such as: beheading, cannibalism and selling women as slaves.

      Over 100 Muslim religious scholars from all over the Muslim world have signed a 28 pages open letter to ISIS refuting 24 points of the group claims,allegations and acts as purely unIslamic and inhumane. The letter is now available in Arabic, English, German and various other foreign languages.

      ISIS is a group of psychopaths whose job is horrify you and I to the maximum, so we would support the war of their Western masters who created, trained and control them, as they did with in the past with Al-Quada in Afghanistan. If America is really genuine about stopping war crimes and atrocities committed by ISIS, then why did they U.S. never showed the same concern when Israel was bombing Gaza to stone ages not long ago?

      Why did the U.S. failed to assemble a coalition of many nations to uphold the rules of international laws, when Israel was committing gruesome war crimes in Gaza?

      Finally, you Arabic is better than good. Where you stationed in the Middle East?

  11. To Moozlem Mahmoud :

    The hindoos in India are trying to force all the moozlems in India to get out of India and move to Pakistan.The hindoos in India want the moozlems in India to get the hell out of India and stay out of India and go park their mudslime moozlem mohammedan butts in Pakistan and stay in Pakistan for good and not come back to India. What say you about the hindoos? Just curious, *grin*.

  12. Carolyn Yeager is one of the precious few writers that gets my blind trust, having never-ever made a false step in identifying the root issue (so far and the only one that i know of never-ever to have made a false step in their entire life is Jesus Christ).
    2019 ends and 2020 begins in a wave of antisemitism hysteria

    antisemitism hysteria and opioids crisis are closely linked, one feeds into another, so if you ever feel that your antisemitism hysteria is flagging, help yourself to a clutch of opioids to help bear the existential pain and anguish—all proceeds go to famous jewish philanthropy causes!

    maybe i did finally spot one fatal misstep:

    Like many of the actions on behalf of Jews taken by President Trump, this order looks worse than it actually is.

    Carolyn, how could you?!? don’t you know that ends never justify means, that the meme of “results” has been banished from modern lexicon, that war is never waged by way of deception.
    when in sword duel with an opponent, no matter how skillful, your best approach is the straightforward mighty swing, take your time to do it right and make sure to tell him to stand still.
    just like chopping down a tree, would you consider mincing little steps left, right, feigning lunges and dekes, parrying—what’s there to parry or block? Swing that axe, Eugene, make every stroke count, don’t quote Sun Tsu’s Art of War to the tree.
    Another example: remember when Putin went Gulag-y on antisemitism in Russia, promised dire penalties to antisemites and holocaust deniers, how effective that was.
    Nary a word against Jews today in Russian media, so the Putin-Trump technique is clearly the most effective cure for the worldwide blight of antisemitism.

  13. Jesus”… simply left behind a corpus of oral teachings which were later refined and organised (sic) into orthodoxy by St Paul, St Jerome, St Augustine and a panoply of popes and cardinals in subsequent centuries.”
    Question for LD: If Jesus left behind only a corpus of oral teachings, does that mean that He could neither read nor write? How convenient for later “organizers” to be able to put words in the mouth of Jesus without any hard copies of written down words from the hand of Jesus himself to muck things up.
    And if Jesus could neither read nor write where did He receive all His knowledge of Old Testament lore? Around the campfire?
    How did Saul/Paul/St. Paul who, obviously could read and write, who wrote his corpus of letters well before the four Gospels were ever written or even heard of, have later refined the oral teachings (Gospels), whose words are the unalterable word of God? Jerome and Augustine came later after the four Gospels had been chosen out of many at the Council of Nicaea under the direction of church historian Eusebius as ordered by (pagan) Roman Emperor Constantine I in AD 325. Some scholars think that there was real contention at the Council of Nicaea not only on what Gospels out of many to include with Paul’s letters etc, to make up the New Testament, but some of the presbyters thought that Egyptian God Horus or Mithra the Persian and later Roman sun God would be more appropriate and not Jesus as the name for the Son (Sun) of God. Some scholars believe that some of the presbyters even came to blows over the debate. However, the name of the possibly illiterate and itinerant preacher/teacher, Jesus, was settled on to settle the matter. Always remember Jesus, the Sun of God begins his return each and every year starting Dec. 25 in the Northern Hemisphere. That is what the Sun of God is supposed to do. Glory be to God’s Sun in the heavens the bringer light and life. (However, they have it ass backwards in the Southern Hemisphere.) Sorry TJ only knows what he reads.

    1. @ Toejamicus, quoting LD:

      “Jesus… simply left behind a corpus of oral teachings which were later refined and organised (sic) into orthodoxy by St Paul, St Jerome, St Augustine and a panoply of popes and cardinals in subsequent centuries.”

      I doubt if LD will respond to your comment, even if she gets round to reading it, because of your rudely condescending reference to her spelling.

      The word “organised” to which you append the word (“sic”) is the CORRECT spelling in English. LD is English and is writing from England. She doesn’t feel the need to use American spelling to please Americans like you — who don’t seem to know the difference between English and American spelling.

      LD only uses American spelling when writing for American publications like the Occidental Observer. All her poems use English spelling: for example, “honor” not “honor”; “labour” not “labor”, “realise” not “realize”, “organised” not “organized”.

      1. @ Toejamicus

        Another ill-educated American makes a fool of himself by assuming airs of intellectual superiority over a highly educated female with a doctorate in Classics, a former academic who has translated material from Sanskrit, Greek, Latin and French on this site. The snide reference to this lady’s “incorrect” spelling by the arrogant clown Toejamicus is yet another example of sexist misogyny.

        P.S. Anyone who chooses a vile name like “Toejamicus” has to have a serious personality disorder.

    2. @ Toejamicus

      Jesus… simply left behind a corpus of oral teachings which were later refined and organised (sic) into orthodoxy by St Paul, St Jerome, St Augustine and a panoply of popes and cardinals in subsequent centuries.”

      Question for LD: If Jesus left behind only a corpus of oral teachings, does that mean that He could neither read nor write? How convenient for later “organizers” to be able to put words in the mouth of Jesus without any hard copies of written down words from the hand of Jesus himself to muck things up….And if Jesus could neither read nor write where did He receive all His knowledge of Old Testament lore? Around the campfire?

      Your comment might have been worth answering if it hadn’t started off with a condescending jibe at LD’s totally CORRECT English spelling and then proceeded in a sneering tone to make sarcastic comments like: “And if Jesus could neither read nor write where did He receive all His knowledge of Old Testament lore? Around the campfire?”

      For a start, at no point did LD suggest that Jesus was illiterate. That is YOUR puerile suggestion. We all know that Jesus taught in the temple, confounding the learned rabbis and impressing them with his vast knowledge of the Jewish scriptures.

      You are too ignorant, it seems, to know that the teachings of the best and oldest prophets, seers and sages of antiquity were handed down by word of mouth (i.e. ORALLY) from master to disciple, from guru to chela. The Buddha’s teachings were handed down orally. So were the teachings of the Vedic sages. So were the teachings of Mahavira, Zoraster, and countless others throughout the ages.

      I won’t say any more except to urge you to show more respect for LD. She does not strike me as a person who in any way merits your rude and offensive tone.

  14. Maurice Pinay’s article on Williamson’s advocacy of the Midrash of the Man-God is key. Treachery has many faces and many masks.

    gid

  15. another Good Jew collides with Truth (predictably, the truth loses):
    The Story of the Lonely Jew: Standing Up for the Uyghurs in London

    Citizens of the upper-class suburb of Hampstead have become accustomed to Andrew. Come rain or shine, this Orthodox Jew protests every week against CCP atrocities.

    See how Good he is, what a philanthropist™ (a goy wishing to call himself a philanthropist must clear it with his intellectual property lawyer), he takes unpaid leave of absence from his janitor employment in order to commute long ways from the blue collar neighborhood to the upper-class suburb of Hampstead every day in order to share pain with Uighurs, tells you right away that Mengele’s grandson is practicing weird medicine in China. Only a Jew, mindful of tikkun olam duty to “repair the world” would have the superhuman strength of character and inexhaustible patience of Job to sacrifice himself thus, rain or shine or skipped hamantaschen sweets.
    and don’t you doubt it for a moment, you anti-uighurite denier, you.
    Oh yes, almost forgot this supporting bit:
    No, the UN did not report China has ‘massive internment camps’ for Uighur Muslims

    Media outlets falsely claimed the UN reported China is holding a million Uighurs in camps. The claim is based on unsourced allegations by an American commission member, US-funded outfits, and a shadowy government-funded opposition group.

    but we all know how irrelevant or socially harmful facts are in this post-truth age of Torah, Torah über alles, awaiting antiChrist’s triumphal entry to Jerusalem, the light unto nations.
    Because Christ is just a fairy tale stolen from Egyptian and Babylonian creationist myths, antiChrist is reality as solid as gun barrel pressing against your spine (why the lucky spineless ones emerge unscathed).

    a few selected soundbites for the busy folks and post-“festive-season” bargain hunters (uppercase emphasis mine):

    On the day of the review, REUTERS published a report with an explosive headline: “U.N. says it has credible reports that China holds million Uighurs in secret camps.”
    The claim was feverishly reproduced by outlets such as The New York Times and The Washington Post to denounce China and call for international action.

    “On its tax forms, CHRD (Chinese Human Rights Defenders) lists its address as the Washington, DC office of Human Rights Watch. HRW has long been criticized for its revolving door with the US government and its excessively disproportionate focus on DESIGNATED ENEMIES of Washington like CHINA, VENEZUELA, SYRIA, AND RUSSIA.

    “Otherwise, there is very little publicly available information about CHRD. It appears to largely be the brainchild of its international director, Renee Xia, an opposition activist who has publicly called for the US government to impose sanctions on Chinese officials under the MAGNITSKY ACT.”

    Go Andrew, the Good Jew, we stand shoulder to shoulder with you and your overriding concern for Muslims worldwide, especially the ones threatened by Catholics (hmm, that Muslim gun attack on a Catholic congregation in Philippines yesterday as they celebrated St Sylvester’s, interesting, no?), J’suis Charlie Hebdo against Russia, China, Iran, Syria, Venezuela and now President Dutarte needs to take notice as well of Good Jews looking his way.

    1. Lobro –

      “Because Christ is just a fairy tale stolen from Egyptian and Babylonian creationist myths, antiChrist is reality as solid as gun barrel pressing against your spine (why the lucky spineless ones emerge unscathed).”

      Which part of your axiom applies to the guessers in this case (to whom you alluded)…. ‘right when wrong’ or ‘wrong when right’…. or both? 🙂

      1. Pat, you need to teach yourself how to read not only the lines of my text but also what’s between them in proper context, given my set of concerns and predilections.
        When i say something like “Christ is just a fairy tale stolen from Egyptian and Babylonian creationist myths“, it is a tongue-in-cheek reference to several commentators here who never fail to spout their contempt of Christ, not only blaspheming in a cursory way as if the topic is as shallow as something out of Marvel comics but also emptying their bladder all over the sizable plurality of fellow commentators who for reasons of their own take Christ very seriously indeed, literally, figuratively, historically and ontologically, a figure that brings eternal wisdom and clear, fog-piercing insight into the workings of the Devil, the master of this evil-ruled material world.
        I suspect that part of it is due to their dyed-in-wool materialism and atheism, which of course is their free choice, means nothing to me personally and i welcome their position so long as they elaborate it in a thorough, logical way, not avoiding or sidestepping my counterarguments by cheap, shoddy setups of straw-men targets.
        And moreover, i demand that in any debate they pay due respect to my position as well, because i have zero time or patience for ad-hominem exchanges, bad for health and a total waste of energy, time and nerves, not to mention that it demeans all parties involved, a game suited only to Jews and pathological cripples who excel in it to the exclusion of any other type of discourse—hype, spin, lies, marketing, self-aggrandizement, the basic outline of Jew “soul”, like cheap, made-in-third-world-sweatshop knockoff of a proper human.
        btw, that comes close to my definition of a jew and jew-like people, namely the belief of exceptionalism, that their rancid deity pre-selected them for ruling others regardless of moral or intellectual qualities, the denial of spirit and free will, blind obedience to YHWH’s insane laws (no need to resort to Talmud, the Tanakh (Torah, etc.) easily suffices to prove my point), the lies and prevarication of a satanic cult masquerading as a religion, which also btw, enables a Jew to claim that he is “secular”, i.e., still a full-blooded Jew though non-religious, a ruse they employ all the time to pacify the gullible goyim, because worship of a system which rejects disembodied spirit independent of time and entropy and morally responsible to an absolute reference of Natural Law, i.e., axiomatic principles of Good and Evil, Just and Unjust, etc.,—how can such worship fail to be anything secular?
        Dostoevsky observed this a long time ago and it was at the core of his writings—if everything is relativistic, as Jews love to point out, then everything is allowed since the notion of Good is a matter of post-truth choice, so that Jews can enjoy their famous perversions to the hilt (and claim that they are Good Jews for that very reason).
        Anyway, here i go off on a tangent, Pat but i am sure you get the point.
        And maybe time to give that ribbing (‘right when wrong’ or ‘wrong when right’) rest because it is constantly misconstrued and quoted out of context.
        I don’t persist in bringing up the assurances made some years ago of how Trump was deliberately set up to win in order to utterly destroy countries like Iran and Syria and then build a vast chain of casinos across the Middle East in partnership with Adelson and Putin, with infrastructural reconstruction contracts going to Bechtel.
        I will grant you a probable tongue-in-cheek intent and also let it rest rather than dredge it up every single instance, like “do you remember when i beat you at that game of chess 22 years ago, ho boy, hahaha, what a victory that was—REMEMBER, HUH?
        Context, Pat, context, let’s get that right and then stick to the paths of verifiable facts and logic.

      2. @ Lobro

        Eloquently expressed, Lobro! Here is my personal New Year’s wish for you: that you are treated in future on this website with the courtesy and respect that your obvious sincerity has earned you. Let’s hope the ad hominem attacks of which you speak are now a thing of the past. Websites have a funny way of moving on. People come, people go. New friends are made, old enemies are slain or die a natural death through entropy.

        Anyway, cheers!

      3. YHVH appears 41 times in 33 of the Rgveda’s 1028 hymns.

        Not many know or want to know.
        Especially the entrenched Academic and Theological Industrial Complexes.

        The knowledge filter is a terrible thing..

        Yahvah

      4. Lobro –

        I knew it was TIC. You need to learn that others write in TIC mode as well, which I did. You have become way too defensive since drifting back here!

        I, too, have zero time or patience for ad-hominem exchanges. Context, my boy. Context! 💥

      5. okay, got you pat, i knew that you are way too bright for that kind of stuff to be taken seriously, so let’s drop the further pursuit of that unworthy topic.

        which is precisely why i became “Defensive”, due to a small extent to previous round-the-clock trashing (not by you) that sensitized me somewhat, but to a much greater extent to the awareness of running out of time at an ever accelerating pace so that any exchanged content focusing on personal subjects especially with view of causing hurt or anger is a criminal waste of precious time, if others cannot lift themselves out of the fumes doesn’t mean that i shouldn’t, because i can and will.
        Again, this is a generalized observation, not aimed at anyone in particular and not to be read between the lines because there is nothing in between, a trite topic.

        and i promise to myself to learn how to freeze-dry verbosity out of my posts, not easy … in this i look up to you and your mentor, Dr Parkinson 😉 not that i am an envious type, everyone must both accept their karmic trajectory while simultaneously struggling to wrestle it toward better outcomes (something i picked up in discussions with a Chinese friend, physically much younger, spiritually much older).
        The upshot being that i am pathologically miserly with my time, refuse to grant it to banalities and people solely in pursuit of outward appearances, futilely trying to impress me, while at the same time always looking to engage in conversation with those who can challenge me—i know i am being selfish but in a worthwhile cause—to move my own goalposts rather than rest on stale laurels.

      6. No hay problema, Senor Lobro….

        As you noted years ago, pursuing brevity, per Dr Parkinson’s Rx 🤢 …..but “BIGGLY” getting me into “YUGE” trouble….
        …..I have that ‘gadfly’ incomplete style, anyway. 🙂

    2. @lobro January 1, 2020 at 10:59 am

      Uyghur girl in Turpan, Xinjiang, China

      The Uyghurs were an Aryan tribe of Muslims who came to China. There are very few left, of the original Aryans.
      They are being horridly abused. I would say this, several years ago one visited China and shopped a mercantile establishments. The ONLY place that did not cheat one was the shops in Xinjiang, which is the last redoubt of the Uyghur. The Communists have been ethnically replacing the Uyghur with Han. It is now only 45% Uyghur, and 40% Han. The capital city, Urumqi, is now 75% Han, 12.8% Uyghur.

      Just as America is being replaced from White to people of color, not by happenstance but by the 140 year work of The Enemy of Humanity.

      The little girl whose photo I have linked to well the future of ALL Aryans may very well be bleaker.

      As the US and Israeli created, armed, financed, medically provided, supported and trained ISIS its leader said when they had overtaken the Yezidis in Iraq and kidnapped the little blue-eyed blonde girls, from their parents, “We are going to breed the WHITE out of them.”

      Surely My Mercy overtakes My Wrath

      1. TLOA, point taken but i don’t see it as closely relevant to my comment.
        Sure, Uighurs are/were an Aryan tribe of Muslims that migrated into the area, maybe even descendants of Roman legions that got trapped there during some ancient campaign and repurposed by Chinese military as I heard on account of their battle skills.
        So what? Tribes and nations were constantly on the move back then, pushed to and fro by more powerful, better organized military forces, did not the Mongols and Manchurians take over the peaceful, mercantilist Chines empire back in the day, who was Kublai Khan?
        The idea is to resist evil, otherwise roll with the punch if the invader also brings new systems of administration, education, knowledge, civilization and so forth.
        And in fact, for all their erstwhile brutality, the Mongols also ushered in an era of orderly peace and regularity all across Asia that lasted solidly for over 150 or so years, allowing safe travel, individual and institutional respect, freedom of worship, wiped out criminality, outlawed torture, and so on, very likely so that epidemiologically speaking, the gain in population and man-years due to these measures outweighed the initial massacres.
        One more point: Uighurs are thoroughly manipulated by the same satanists that invented Wahabbi-Salafi sect, ISIS, al-Qaeda and offshoots (and in fact employ a number of brain-dead, disaffected Uighurs, Chechens, Bosnians), who also organized unrests in Hong Kong (for the same purpose as the Uighur rebellion), in Tehran, Kiev Maidan—WHY?—ask Hillary Clinton or her boss, George Soros or his boss, the Rothschild dynasty, or their boss, Lucifer, because this is the chain of command, therefore I consider focusing on Uighur vs. Han discussion a red herring, just like Russians vs. Poles or Ukrainians, Sunni vs. Shia, feminists vs. traditionalists (oh yeah, add the Pussy Riot to the above list, since they work side by side with ISIS, same assembly line, maybe different shift) and so on and so forth.

        This is our enemy, their sole reason for existence is to sow iniquity, mayhem, chaos in China, Russia, Middle East, Africa, Latin America and EVERYWHERE and will do so again and again until forcibly stopped, destroyed, driven out of business—this is the essential message of Christ and the reason He even existed—to teach us how to see clearly and make our own, morally informed opinions and decisions—not whether Uighurs had blue eyes or my ancestors migrated from Armenia under the Seljuk pressure.

        I like to stick to the basics, the trick is to discover what those basics are.
        “Rats are underneath the piles,
        Jew is underneath the lot.”

        Well, not quite, Lucifer is that basic stratum and even he was deposited there by the Creator.

  16. Vatican Two novus ordo New World Order New Age NEO-“Christians”/NEW-“Catholics” may have some faults but the NEO-“Christians”/NEW-“Catholics” sure do know how to start a New Year in a Fun & Entertaining way! 🙂

    dailystormer.name/when-popes-attack-lunatic-anal-pope-goes-buckwild-and-attacks-pilgrim-who-tried-to-shake-his-hand/

    It’s a HOOT!

  17. I think it was John Calvin who got the witch trials transferred to the regular court, which was the beginning of the end for the Malleus Maleficarum and the hideous religious persecution of the Sacred Female as man’s contact with God the Universe…
    The redesign of the Natural Moon/Menstrual Calendar, replaced by the Gregorian, was a major step in the Vatican devolution of the Female, which has now been replace by Holy Mother the Church…
    It’s probably a fair guess that Calvin was a Jew named Cohen…
    And Jews have done a lot of good in the world, when it comes to breaking free of a lot of official repression…
    SAKI
    When I see the Moon and the Stars, I get sense if the Sacred, and I wonder if all of man’s religious ideas are not derived from his reverent reaction to the heavenly bodies, put together into stories that took on a life of their own and were co-opted, modified and fitted into the authoritarian script…
    Try not to be offended – but do you think it’s possible that Jesus, the so-called SON-SUN of God, left no writings because he never actually existed, he’s just a made-up character created by the Roman Catholic Church out of the Pagan Sun Worship to fit the bill for their State Religion?
    And, if the Pharaohs were actually Ancient Alien Avatars from the Sun StarGate, then maybe these establishment religions have been suppressing that information with cover stories and adversity politics, the same way the true knowledge of the design and construction of the Pyramids by the original Masons through the use of Miraculous Technology has been suppressed?
    https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=the+sun+is+hollow
    “Masonry is a descendant of, or is founded upon, a divinely imparted religion, which long antedated the prime date of creation as given in the Bible. It is all that remains to us of a world religion, which flourished in an antiquity so old that it is impossible to affix a date”… Foster Bailey – 33rd Degree Mason

    1. BD

      None of what you say here must NECESSARILY remove Jesus from the equation of having actually existed. The trick is in finding compatibility between that and what the “natural world” is IN ESSENCE.

      i’ve only been writing about this for years, but apparently most of those who have an understanding of where I’m coming from are not inclined to offer any lengthy comments to indicate that. Or maybe they feel as though what I write needs no elaboration? Nonetheless, it would be nice to hear more from them, if only to SUPPORT the understanding and maybe even expand on it in offering another way of expressing its compatibility with Jesus

  18. rather than harangue the assembly with personal, overextended views, i will let a few authors speak for themselves on the current and generally prevailing topic of these threads and Lasha’s overall concerns.
    Some will be linked, to a maximum number of three allowed without automatic detention in spam camp, others will be referenced by keywords or subject lines and searchable by reputable engines such as yandex or duckduckgo.
    The world is rapidly descending into depraved darkness of inhuman perversion, moral blindness and inability to recognize the Devil riding on their necks, laughing uproariously—Baudelaire must be likewise amused at how prescient his maxim was about Devil’s finest trick is to have convinced humanity that he does not exist—and jew understands this perfectly (“Things are not that simple, Rebbe. Some events do take place but are not true; others are—although they never occurred.”)—so here we go, these are some of the things that have been buzzing inside my head recently.
    The Irish Savant, More demons, i find that irish savant’s position is increasingly aligned with mine on a bunch of topics, also the links within this one worth a gander.
    Also look up youtub’d “The Theology of Demons – Fr Chad Ripperger PhD” part 1 and part 2, by the same presenter, “Spiritual Theology Series: Demons (part 2) ~ Fr Ripperger” (at one point he relates how a possessing demon when pressed for answers explained how every single level of the Masonic rite bears the name of a specific prince high in Luciferian hierarchy.
    Then, and this one is well worth thinking about in some depth for what it says and what it alludes to,
    Why Sexual Morality May be Far More Important than You Ever Thought, on the road to perdition, a signpost to collective hell, the only question for me is which is the chicken and which the egg.
    Then there is also this one, Pope Benedict XVI – short documentary film but it may be of a more personal appeal to me not only because he was an early supporter of Hitler but also due to some facts i looked up that strengthen my positive assessment as well as the grotesque circumstances of his ouster engineered by the well-known Hillary-Soros-Rothschild-Satan pipeline, the one that installed the present p00pe in the epicenter of global satanism.
    They may seem victorious but i want to see the ending, maybe a surprise on the way.

  19. Attention! (To whomever can answer my query):

    I noticed on Drudge Report this morning, that a “public reading” of the Talmud was attended by 90,000 Jews on New Years Day at a Met-Life stadium in New Jersey. I wonder if the more disgusting verses of the Talmud (like promotion of child sex, etc.) were broadcast – and how they were perceived…

  20. HAWK
    I think you and me are basically on the same Pantheist wavelength…
    We’d both like to see the biosphere restored to its wholesome state with humans treating the planet as thought it were of the utmost importance, in the belief that only on that path will the world find peace and move into the next paradigm……..
    I know it’s all space between what few solid particles exist, lots of space… and that the particles don’t exist intil they’re accelerated… or at least that’s what I heard… acceleration manipulates time and distance, weight and mass….
    At some point the physical world gives itself up to the nonphysical….
    Is there a difference between the subatomic wave world and the spiritual, is that where the spirits come and go?
    Eventually the mind boggles as we try to make physical sense out of it all… a circle can not be a square, so there must be limits… but the universe must evidently be limitless… unless travelling in a single direction eventually brings the traveler back to where he started from…
    I have tried to follow the big gurus, but i find I can’t follow them too long, which maybe makes me dogmatic too in whatever is my own way, just like our religious friends so poked fun at… or maybe the big gurus are FOS… talk too much…
    I don’t believe in devils… not if i believe in god…
    If god makes devils, that’s out of my league…
    If they exist without his endorsement, it means he’s not omnipotent….
    I get you… but I’m not sure i find solace in the idea of the spiritual existence/nirvana….

    1. Bark
      The most important thing for ALL of us is to never lose heart. Next to that in importance is to never underestimate the power of projecting thoughts towards a desire to see as smooth a transition as is possible for this planet’s transcendence to a higher realm of existence for all caring people. If we do nothing else but that…

      Like the Taoists say, ” to be is to do”

      A-itu 💖

  21. Dear TROJ, I prefer to debate people with a sense of good taste and decorum that you have yet to demonstrate.

    I have no idea why you are disrespectful and hostile towards anything Muslim. I did some search about your kind of people and found out that you suffer from some sexual frustration. You should seek help, my friend.

  22. Upon the advice of Toby and for the sake of other people on this site, I felt I am obliged to answer your bizarre question.

    On December 10, the government of India passed the CAA, which legalized the granting of citizenship based on religion and specifically excluded Muslims from obtaining citizenship. India also is planning to implement a pan-India citizen verification process known as the National Register of Citizens (NRC). The combination of CAA and NRC would give the Indian Government legal grounds to declare Indian Muslims as non-citizens.

    Since enactment of CCA, more than 20 Indian Muslim have been killed by police firing into crowds of unarmed anti-CAA protestors.

    In Uttar Pradesh, state police under the administration of Modi’s extremist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) party have violently attacked students at the prestigious Aligarh Muslim University.

    The Indian government has also banned protests and cut internet in parts of the nation’s capital Delhi and throughout the states of Uttar Pradesh and Karnataka.

    Even a 6-year-old child would tell you that the new Indian law is unfair and stinks. In America, you are entitled for citizenship automatically when you are born on US soil or in US waterways or air space even if your parents are not living legally in the U.S.

    I find it rather odd that you would side with such an immoral discriminatory law. Anyone who says India is the largest democracy in the world needs to be examined.

    1. India was a slave for for then 1000 years. First under Muslims ( Arabs, Afghans, Mongols) and then under the Christians (British, French, Portuguese). Sanatana Dharma (Hinduism) is the oldest religion on Earth. And all Ancient Civilisations were Pagan (Hindu). Hindus never invaded any country but fight back only to protect our culture and religion from Barbarians. India is the only country from where Jews were never kicked out or harassed. Ask any Jew and he will tell you the TRUTH. Hindu Holocaust is never discussed because we Hindus are not cry babies. Muslims in India are safer and living in a much better environment than in any Western country or even Muslim countries. So stop calling Hindus as Terrorists. TRUTH will win because TRUTH fears no investigation.

  23. Please read Blogs of Captain Ajit Vadakayil.
    GOOGLE Ajit Vadakayil Islam
    GOOGLE Ajit Vadakayil Christianity
    GOOGLE Ajit Vadakayil Zionist
    GOOGLE Ajit Vadakayil Hinduism
    GOOGLE Ajit Vadakayil Rothschild.
    And get valuable information on all topics. Captain Ajit Vadakayil is No 1 Blogger in the World.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *