Orestes V., you're correct. Neoliberalism kills any Republic or democracy because that's it's intent. It was well known back in the early times of organized civilizations that super wealthy were destructive to country. That's why usery laws are found in religious texts of all faiths. It's one reason Greek and Roman and other empires collapsed. I'm not sure the British empire collapsed, it may have just changed hands or names. Those civilizations didn't control wealth distribution.
I don't believe and there's plenty of evidence that anyone before Nixon, or is it Reagan, made it everybody's business for a wedge issue. It simply is NOT. All of this 'private laundry' stuff shouldn't be on the public stage or anyone else's business. That's goes for sexual choices or any of the manufactured divisive issues. Just stick to the Constitution as NOT interpreted by Christian courts or law makers. The Constitution have US freedom of choice and the rest. The Constitution shouldn't be a buffet or menu where one person can choose what they like and then force it on others. Freedom Of Choice, Period. All the changes in the age of progress, which is well over now, were made to Enforce the Constitution, take the Constitution out of the hands of zealots.
By the way, I didn't hear Democracts complaining about loosing their 1st Amendment Rights. Just endorsing taking them away. Another thing Mr Reich may not be caring about. I know this will soon change, but we've lost more First Amendment protections under this passing administration then under previous. Here in this state the Democrats are passing a law that will allow towing companies to keep vehicles they tow, more legalized theft.
There's more, but I wanted to say that there's more reasons to not trust the 'moderate' left. After all it was a left president and his brother that were assassinated before he could force the Zionists to register as foreign agents after they, the CIA and others in and out of the 'Democratic' administration have nuclear tech and secrets to Zionists. In fact it's was a democratic president that covered up for Zion when they attempted to murder the entire crew of the USS LIBERTY. However, keep in mind both parties have been shilling for Oligarchs and Neoliberalism for a long long time.
Hello, Ellen, wonderful to see you around again; hope you're as well as can be. As to "neoliberalism," whether Rome fell because its economy was too "laissez-faire" and oligarchist is actually interesting now that you bring it up. On a possibly(?) relevant note, AFAIK its economy must've been decimated during the Great Crisis of the Third Century concurrent to Rev. 8:8-9's mention of the "third part of the ships destroyed" since "ships" = economics. (cf. Ezek. 27:25) This of course goes into a whole slew of historicist Christian eschatology probably better saved for elsewhere in detail eventually...
Yes, you're absolutely on the right track about the British empire and I've been pondering this in the past few months also: its goal was to create a Zionist occupation regime in Palestine, and once that was accomplished the central "focus" would shift to the Middle East and remove Britain itself from the "chief spotlight." The Masonic/occultic monarchy of Britain continues as insiders, but outwardly its direct activity is "reduced" in common public perception into an "assisting" role, though God knows just how ultra-"pivotally" important they still remain since the MI6 and CIA are powerfully vital propagators of whatever geopolitical agenda the Knights of Malta order them to achieve.
OK, on the "social issue" of abortion, if I recall correctly: a) traditionally the idea of abortion-on-demand the way it's propagated today presumably would've been met with horror in past generations and b) the Protestant majority of America back then viewed organized opposition to abortion as a "Catholic issue." The question here on individual liberty pertains to whether this implies an unborn child is human and has a right to live or not. But I know these are rather "sensitive" topics, so I won't debate this further since ATM there's much larger pictures to focus on in this time-dissipating world...
> "didn't hear Democracts complaining about loosing their 1st Amendment Rights. Just endorsing taking them away"
Yeah, and unfortunately the Republicans aren't any better sometimes. Both toxic "mainstreams" love Kool-Aid-binging echo chambers where they endlessly project their own guilt on anyone who disagrees with them.
> "in this state the Democrats are passing a law that will allow towing companies to keep vehicles they tow"
Hold up, what?! I certainly didn't hear about this...
Anyways, notwithstanding a bit of apparent differences over some social issues, I definitely concur with everything else you're saying, Ellen: the "liberals"/"moderate left" 100% are not trustworthy because they've conclusively proven last year November that they selfishly prioritize quenching first-world inconveniences to the point of disregarding a f---ing Holocaustic Judeo-SS genocide against Palestine. And yes, exactly: both "mainstream" establishments bootlick for depravity.
Once again -- just wanted to say -- absolutely glad seeing you around, Ellen. In these coming months I hope to rapidly explain what's going on and why in this seemingly nonsensically absurd world. Beware the long-term effects of this current "MAGA civil war"... I'm highly certain ATM that this is a manufactured manipulation scheme to create an unholy "left-right anti-establishment" synthesis which will then be consolidated into bootlicking for the final culmination of the "New" World Order. Will try to explain this in detail sometime later this month... not sure if you also noticed my "25 predictions for '25" Stack in case it might be of interest for you as food for thought.
Emmanuel, thank you for your well wishes. I do happen to get temporarily 'derailed' at times. We all have something to contend with I believe.
I appreciate your attention to my opinions on Rome and Neoliberism. I see where Neoliberism would get the Roman Empire to declare Catholicism as the State religion for it's useful power structure. An organization like Catholicism would appear very useful to a leader losing control of his Empire, but in your postulation the Empire may have been the useful tool.
I must admit that while I've read the Bible, it was a bit more then forty years ago. I read it to understand why my Therapist at the time told me she was no longer a Jew because their Holy Book advocated for such horrible things in god's name. I will have to get my hands on a Bible (my preference) or just access those passages online (I know they're easily brought up).
I actually don't deny what you are saying, I just don't have the mental muscles for it yet. I've been thinking on it since you posted it months ago. At first it was too far for me. Ironic that I was raised a Catholic, went to a Catholic school for two years and then on to the after school specials in Catholicism at the church, but really don't know much about the book, just that everything's a sin ;-). I hope to get clarity on what you're posting.
I've only gotten to my geopolitical view over the last four or less years. It took a lot of purging and shutting off of identifiable incorrect inflow of managed information and searching and finding Substack to get me this far. I'm fortunate I was open to doing that because I've read Chalmers Johnson, Tuchman and others throughout the last fifteen or more years. Of course those books were introductions to the bigger picture I barely grasp today.
Delighted to hear, and you're of course more than welcome, Ellen. To my own admission, I probably ought to pray for you and some other friends in my Substack "circle" far more frequently, seeing my spiritual life is wont for slouchiness on a weekly basis and prayers get "difficult" to concentrate on.
Just curious, do you have a copy of the KJV? I strongly recommend making sure you have a solid translation to go off of, as almost every modern mainstream version is demonstrably corrupted in its subtle wording alterations littered especially across the New Testament. Speaking of which, this month I will see what I can get done analyzing translation variations and compiling some nice statistics + explained differences in some lengthy compilations.
So by "holy book" in the context of your therapist's leaving their "Jewish" identity, if I understand correctly, "holy book" there is a reference to the Hebrew Bible/Old Testament? AFAIK (just to restate in case, as I don't know if I explicitly went over this with you in previous discussions) there's no intrinsic contradiction between the Old and New Testaments, because this illusion is *exactly* what the NWO deception is trying to push at the religious level. (though even when it comes to the Talmud, the question of whether rabbinic/Talmudic/Pharisaic writings push horrendous discrimination/bigotry is questionable, because actual devoutly Talmudic "Jews" i.e. Neturei Karta reject these forms of racism, as it's in actuality cabalistic/occultic teachings from Babylonian-derived "Kabbalah" that propagates these "special chosen racial people" doctrines).
Wow, you were raised Catholic? Interesting; here's a brief summary of what I've most recently been able to make out of the Catholic system: at some "semi-insider" level they completely reject entire books of the New Testament, while at the outmost level they pretend those books line up with Catholic teaching. I'm talking especially about the three Pastoral Epistles (I Timothy, II Timothy, Titus) by Paul, which in their reliable Textus Receptus/King James reading debunks various ascetic, dualist, and Gnostic teachings "quietly" seeped in Catholicism. One of the Catholic Church's most prized manuscripts is the 4th-century Alexandrian text Codex Vaticanus (or "Codex B"), which leaves out the Pastoral Epistles entirely. Yet at the outer level to pretend three entire letters aren't canonical would draw too much suspicion to the outside world, so in the Latin Vulgate and subsequently translated Douay-Rheims Bible, the "Catholic" insider Jerome simply modified all those "problematic" passages in the Pastorals which were contrary to Catholic teaching.
Some few months ago I did a comprehensive analysis of Paul's letters, and when I divided in each book/set of books the number of KJV/Vulgate deviations over the total number of verses, I found that in Paul's ten "main" letters the average was about 3-4%, in Hebrews it was about 10-11% (if I recall correctly), and in the Pastorals it was ~14-15%. So this shows that -- very subtly -- the Catholic Bible reflects the same bias of the "insider" Vaticanus manuscript in taking problem with the teachings of Paul in the Pastoral Epistles, albeit at a subtler, sneakier level so most people don't even realize because it flies right over their heads.
Here's a spoiler Catholicism doesn't tell its laity: the emphasis on "chastity" and super-strict standards which turn into everyday killjoys are only for the "outside" "catechumen" because the insiders believe something completely different. Insider Catholic doctrine is hardly different from the "Marcionite" radical Gnostic doctrines of the 2nd century (they believed that nothing done in the flesh applied to the spirit, so one can commit horrific crimes and it doesn't matter so long as you "gained esoteric knowledge"), the only difference being that Marcionism wasn't actually "fully Gnostic" in nature because it openly gave its Gnostic teachings to the outside world, while in actual Gnostic structures the "true Gnostic inner teachings" are only reserved for the highest of the hierarchy's initiated cultists. So for example, Catholicism co-opts the Pastoral's emphasis on seemingly strict standards for women and turns it into a subjugation at its "traditionalist"/ultraconservative levels, yet it shares with Marcionism this idea that women are exalted when celibate. Marcionism simply propagated this to everyone and said all women should be celibate from sex/marriage, while Catholicism reserves this privilege for the initiated nuns while in utmost duplicity telling the lower ranks of Catholic women that their role is "kitchen and childbearing," pretending when making the pitch to the "outside" "masses" that Catholicism elevates women for staying in the house to their confined burdens (even though in the long run it's the exact opposite -- the "lower rankings" of women in the Dark Ages and modern "traditionalist"/ultraconservative Catholicism are regarded as second-class citizens when they submit to their told "duty of childbearing"). By completely polar contrast, the early Christian church -- in line with Mosaic Judaism -- emphasized compassion and sympathetic consideration for women's needs at an individual level and bestowed great honor for those taking selfless roles of community leadership guiding family and local brethren unto edified sanctification in shared communion with God.
I typed Holy Book instead of what my Therapist might have said at the time. I couldn't remember what book she called out, but already knew of the horrors advocated for in the SJV of the First Testament.
My mother had ten children because she was devout in her way. (I think she only could remembered the 'Don'ts' of her Mother's teachings because I don't remember her preaching any of the 'Do's'.) The only reason the number of children was limited to ten was that my father went and got a vasectomy after trying to use condoms or any method to stop the annual baby blossom. My mother would not, under any circumstances, allow for regulation of the number of children.
I laugh at my father thinking he could sneak condom use past my mother or a box of 'balloons' past a horde of kids. I can imagine the anger on Mom's face seeing us throw those water bombs at each other.
SJV? Hmm, for whatever reason, I'm not familiar with that acronym. Though if it's the Hebrew Bible, as it sounds like so far, then I broadly understand the typical concerns as it relates especially to Joshua-Judges. At face value it can look as if the Hebrews during the time of Joshua were brutal mass murderers, though the Fifth Book of Moses says:
"Not for thy righteousness, or for the uprightness of thine heart, dost thou go to possess their land: but for the wickedness of these nations the LORD thy God doth drive them out from before thee, and that he may perform the word which the LORD sware unto thy fathers, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob." (Deut. 9:5)
Since the same Torah also forbids the mistreatment of strangers (Ex. 23:9), shedding of innocent blood (Deut. 19:10), and also expressly prohibits abhorrence of Edomites and Egyptians (Deut. 23:7) for reasons respectively of brotherhood and refuge status, this means that when God ordained Joshua's slaughter campaigns, they were against nations which were exceedingly wicked in sanctioned societal practices.
"Who is a God like unto thee, that pardoneth iniquity, and passeth by the transgression of the remnant of his heritage? he retaineth not his anger for ever, because he delighteth in mercy." (Mic. 7:18)
"The Lord is slow to anger, and great in power, and will not at all acquit the wicked: the Lord hath his way in the whirlwind and in the storm, and the clouds are the dust of his feet." (Nah. 1:3)
Wow, what a journey growing up that must've been for you!
> "I can imagine the anger on Mom's face seeing us throw those water bombs at each other"
Thank you, and I respect your courteously stated differences of opinion on these issues. As to the Jesuit-Masonic conspiracy, there are some links between those two elements subtly indicated in these sources:
Well, you need to remember that what people commonly think of as "Roman Catholicism" is not actually what the highest levels of Catholicism actually follows -- in all clandestine NWO operations running outwardly sugar-coated organizations/ideologies, the ideology/system propagated to the outside world is an invented halfway "fake" completely different in pretense from the activity/ideology of the "insiders." In the case of Catholicism, the highest insiders all know that it is not merely "high church Christianity" but actually Johannism, which is itself a disguise for Satanism. At the outside level the Johannite dimension is disguised as veneration and honoring of "St. John the Baptist" or "St. John the Evangelist," but at the inside level they know that the figure being honored/venerated is actually the old pagan deity Janus, the two-headed being. The two heads represent occultic dualism, and at the highest initiation levels therefore represent the two sides of the devil: his "light" side as Lucifer and his "dark" side as Satan. This conclusion is something I individually arrived at some time ago after a bit of study and consideration.
The military wing of the Catholic Church -- the Jesuit Order and its Knights of Malta partners -- control the machinations of every major global institution behind a facade of proxies obeying dictates from whatever their superiors instruct them to do. So to answer your question, YES: the Jesuit/Maltese power definitely has more power than the Episcopalians and Zionists.
First off, Episcopalianism: since it's a mainstream Protestant denomination, this means the Jesuit front organization used to hijack it is Freemasonry. The Superior General of the Jesuit Order controls the 32nd/33rd degrees of Scottish Rite Freemasonry and its initiated members, so the orders are handed down to the lower echelons of Masonic proxies who influence what is taught and preached at the Protestant denominations, which then is seeped into the pastors who themselves probably have no idea they are NOT teaching what the Bible says.
As to Zionism: while I know this might be hard to believe, the fact of the matter is that all pretense of "Jewish control" is an illusion. The "Jews" do not fundamentally control institutions by their own will and decision-making; the highest levels of their fraternities and "representing" organizations i.e. B'nai B'rith and the ADL are dictated to them by even higher-ranking (and non-Jewish) entities, but their bosses are kept secret from public view while the "court Jew" proxies at prominent institutions are publicly known for their influence, so this by design makes sure beguiled bigots will blame "the Jews" for what the Jesuit-Masonic cabal is guilty of. Now, exactly how the Jesuits control Israeli society through which "line" of proxies, I don't know for certain. What is certain AFAIK is that the British imperial axis ever since its existence as a global oppressing power has been doing the bidding of the Jesuit Order this whole time. Therefore when the British paved the way for Zionist successes in 1948, this was done at the behest of Jesuit aims in the Middle East to whip up a final cataclysm.
Now, yes: the Vatican itself has publicly never fully embraced Zionism and argued that Jerusalem should be internationalized. This is how duplicitous the Jesuits/Vatican are: since they are the inheritors of the old Knights Templar tradition and therefore want Jerusalem for themselves, they brainwash/hoodwink "the Jews" into violently wresting Palestine from Arab control and hand its control over to a Jesuit-manipulated "Zionist" government. Once Zionism serves its purpose and could be swept out of the way, the Vatican will take Jerusalem for itself and declare it a fully internationalized center for all religions to unite together behind the pontiff. IOWs, the Jesuits quietly and pragmatically support "Zionist" extremism only so the pendulum eventually swings in the other direction and they then co-opt "anti-Zionism" to justify their *ACTUAL* agenda.
The everyday individual Catholics do not know what their church's highest levels are up to, because they're just used as pawns by their pontiff to prop up the Catholic hierarchy without any idea exactly what system they're sustaining.
Oh, as to SCOTUS, it's controlled by the Sovereign Military of Malta and Opus Dei. The "right-wing" justices there were pushed into the Court by SMoM/OD operative Leonard Leo, who's involved with Project 2025.
Yeah, I understand, it's a v e r y difficult matter to grasp in full, believe me. I'll try to break it down a bit what I can...
> "it explains that Ignatius Loyola was a Jew that established the order of the Jesuits. Pretty much a hack that manipulated the Vatican"
Oh, boy... here's my recommendation, and FYI I don't fault you on this because I know you're curious and scouring around: don't pay ANY attention to these claims of "Jewish control of Jesuits," because that's an age-old psyop tactic. The Jesuit Order has zero legitimate "Jewish" origin and -- quite to the contrary -- have from their inception been virulently opposed to Judaism, banning Jews by "ancestry" from joining the Order; promoting ultramontane Catholic hatred of Jewish people throughout Europe; attacking the Jewish foundation of Christianity, namely the seventh-day Sabbath (which the 1st-century Apostles observed; Jesus's disciples did NOT observe the pagan day of the sun a.k.a. "Sunday").
See, here's the thing: genuine critics of Jesuitism will never push antisemitic canards, because us longtime researchers (as you may recall, RigbyRigbyson is also a fantastic expert) into Jesuit tentacles understand that "Jewish control" canards have always been invented by Rome to blame "the Jews" for what they -- the papists -- are guilty of. Therefore the "Jewish Jesuit" theory is nothing more than a fifth column ruse to align anti-Jesuit researchers behind false narratives as a diversion tactic.
> "they were big on liberation theology in the Americas. Which was diametrically different from what you espoused in your post"
Yes. My point in that previous discussion was that the Jesuits control both the "left" liberation theology/Marxist dimension AND also the "right" neofascist/neo-Nazi dimension in those Latin American countries, and therefore the Marxist side did not constitute any meaningful opposition to neofascist terrorism because for one, the existence of a Marxist/Communist party provided a perfect "foil" whereby the neo-Nazis could claim they were there to "fight the threat of Marxist Communism." If lower rankings of the Jesuits were liquidated in the process, that would've been 100% because a) as a distracting PR ploy to make people believe "the Jesuits are genuinely opposed to fascism," and b) the lower rankings of the Jesuit Order are disposable in the eyes of their superiors and therefore can be sacrificed to accomplish the broader end agenda because "the ends justify the means"; cf: https://archive.org/details/endjustifiesmean00hurl
> "Any truth to this claim of Loyola being Jewish and manipulating the Vatican"
...no. Absolutely disregard people who propagate such claims that the Jesuits constituted "Jewish infiltration of the Vatican from the outside," because that's pure bogus pushed by malicious coadjutors and deceivers who either are duped or have no interest in the truth.
> "So Johannism comes from St John the Baptist, right? He disguises as Satan since or a twisted version of him does it?"
Uh... maybe you're almost on the right track here... I'll try to explain with further clarity. So Johannism in terms of its ACTUAL ideology (NOT what they claim to the outside world) doesn't come from John the Baptist nor John the Apostle. They only PRETEND like it does to the outside world or to the lower initiates of their order as a ruse.
Johannism only pretends to be based off of "St. John" in a Christian garb to the outside world and masses who do not know what lurks behind the curtain. Because at the insider level the highest initiates all know that this "Johann"/"John" they venerate is NOT John the Baptist nor John the Apostle, rather the pagan deity Janus which represents Satan.
It's the deity Janus -- faked/masked under a rebranded image as "St. John" to the outside world -- which represents Satan, not the actual John the Baptist nor John the Apostle.
Think about it this way, if it helps: you know how the Nazis weren't "real socialists" and only pretended to be socialists to trick socialists, right? Likewise, Johannism has nothing to do with the real John the Baptist nor John the Apostle of Christianity, but only co-opts this "St. John" image to the outside world to trick everyday Catholics and Christians broadly.
> "The Knight of Malta acts as a humanitarian agency, they do it to carry out their seemingly nefarious agenda?"
Yes, with a catch: remember what I said about how these occultic/clandestine agencies have "two sides," one sanitized fake image for the outside world and the true evil teachings reserved for the "inner circle"? It's the same way with the Sovereign Military Order of Malta (SMoM): their "humanitarian charity" is only for the outer realm to make the masses believe they're propagating Catholic concepts of gracious, selfless charity. At the inside level they are 100% a clandestine, sinister organization. The Knights of Malta control the Anglo-American intelligence agencies since at least the Cold War, since I recall both the FBI and CIA were founded by members of the Knights of Malta. (such high-ranking Catholics in the U.S. are of course loyal to the Roman pontiff and not to America)
The Knights of Malta funded the right-wing extremist governments of South America during the Cold War, and alongside Opus Dei are the stringpullers of Trumpist extremism here in America -- Project 2025 goes right back to the KoM and Opus Dei.
> "One last question as I need to get going? Why are the Scots so influential in carrying out their agenda? That’s why they hate the Catholics so much in Northern Ireland?"
Hmm... I can understand why you're asking the question. FYI it's not about the ethnic group themselves associated with these agendas, rather the agendas themselves, because so long as someone is successfully propagating the higher Satanic echelons' bidding, that's all that matters to those high-ranking occult insiders. I don't know much about that ethnic conflict, but all you really need to know in the utmost simplest terms for now is that on the outside, these religious/ethnic clashes over time are manipulated into "dialectical" controlled wars, because at the insider level it doesn't matter to the highest initiates which direction they come from to ascend up the cone/pyramid -- whichever side they approach from, so long that tippy-top is approached at the end (since to them "the end justifies the means," as I mentioned above), it leads to the same deep-seated occultic insider knowledge anyways.
> "So , if Zionists are being manipulated are the English the main perpetrators of the Palestinian genocide? "
Yes and no: the Zionist Judeonazis at the end of the day -- whether beguiled or not -- are still responsible for the war crimes and lakes of blood they have on their hands. The "English"/Anglo-Masonic structure indeed is absolutely guilty of sponsoring/stringpulling this Zionazi imperialist regime into existence, though remember: the Anglo-Masonic British power structure is controlled by the Jesuits and/or Knights of Malta, since Britain is a longstanding central seat of Scottish Rite Freemasonry, and the highest SR Freemasons take orders from the Superior General of the Jesuits.
> "Thanks my dear Emmanuel, as you can see I’m confused and perplexed, perhaps the most I’ve been since I realized Santa, the Easter Bunny and the Tooth Fairy were not real!!"
Absolutely more than welcome, Orestes, my friend; if this response of mine still needs clarification on any parts, feel completely welcome to let me know on what more I can clarify, because so long as you are willing to listen and understand what's going on, I will take the hours of time it will consume out of my day to explain what I can to you.
If one is all about beating Trump or beating republicans, that exactly turns one into them. Why? The other side to them can be just as bad, actually even worse, and Reich will support them. This is how Reich exactly supports those he most vociferously criticizes. People who are Zionist yet “critical” of Israel aren’t really critical of Israel at all. Again they have no principles and pretend like Israel is genocidal due to bad leaders. It’s just bad luck, otherwise Zionism is great. It’s like, Naziism would be fantastic but for Hitler.
Exactly; a Republican is someone who walks by a homeless person with no regard, while a Democrat will exploit their downtrodden status to promote themselves as saviors of the poor while doing next-to-nothing meaningful to help that person. (unless of course that homeless person is a Palestinian resident of Gaza whose home got bombed by a Judeo-SS missile funded by Ku Klux Kamala, because then the Democrat wouldn't even pretend to care since "tEh sItUaShOn iZ KomPlEkS aNd mY pRoBlEmz ArE mOre iMpoRtAnT")
Yes. I also believe the Republican vs Democrat Party thing is a ruse in that both are playing the 'Good cop, Bad cop' game to soften up the populace for horrible legislation. Horrible legislation is proposed by Republicans cue uproar, then Democrats get the majority, but simply have to pass similar* horrible legislation because 'whatever reason' cue grudging acceptance.
Yeah, it turns from "right is right and wrong is wrong" into "right is when my side does it and my side can basically do no wrong whatsoever!"
- "Drink cherry Kool-Aid because blue raspberry is poisoned with cyanide!"
- "Drink blue raspberry Kool-Aid because cherry is poisoned with arsenic!"
This reminds me, a number of times I see these so-called "leftists" with an inherent liberal-shilling mentality lamenting why they got "betrayed," and after I explain to them that both sides are the outward dialectical propagators of a unified conspiracy, I get no response or they are drunk on denialism insisting "their" side is immune to any form of outside manipulation. It turns out that sadly too many people *seemingly* on the right track on the utmost basic moral issues don't truly care about a) understanding the practical truth as to where the problem comes from at its root and b) how to actually alleviate them; their preoccupation is believing idealistic "woke" dogmas.
I notice commonly that large swaths on the "left" who never abandoned that old "liberal shill" mentality come to technically the correct end conclusions: that Trump is a menace to America, that racism and poor race relations are a societal problem, etc. etc. Yet their reasoning for *why* they think that way is flawed, and when I explain to them that both the "right-wing" menace and "left-wing" mainstream counterreaction are controlled opposition, they refuse to accept the truth no matter how much evidence I show them that "right-wing extremists" are Jesuit/Knights of Malta-controlled intelligence puppets, that "white supremacy" is the outward propagation of Scottish Rite Freemasonic networks, that "woke" neo-Marxism is the product of combined Jesuit/Communist subversion, that Trump is a Jesuit puppet, that CRT-esque explanations of racial tensions don't do anything to improve race relations, etc. etc.
Yeah, the level of shilling is truly insane when it comes to these people thinking "the other side is an imminent threat to this country so my side must be voted in no matter what!!" I've seen similar levels of lunacy on the right i.e. my next-door elderly Republican neighbor once screeching at me as I was talking to his grown son about how Trump is a controlled stooge of the NWO and that "mainstream politics" is a dialectical delusion.
Some people won't let facts intrude past their echo chamber walls they build and (may or may not) expect others to pay for.
My Trump supporting sibling (never saw a cult she didn't like) got real angry when I referred to the D + R candidate supporters as Blue and Red MAGAs. She said only Trump supporters are MAGAs. I rolled my eyes and refrained from saying that I was referring to the level of cultish behavior, the devotion to their own created image of that which they worship and hatred of 'others'.
Here's a funny teaching from their cult; they were taught that Jupiter is a spaceship and that the Japanese were aliens from another planet, not Jupiter spaceship. Also anybody not white is not an acceptable human. I loved listening to their stories while they were seeking to convert me. I kept a straight attentive face, but I never repeated the insanity of they beliefs. I don't like gossip, I've seen the damage it does. I guess it's sometimes wise that people don't trust shy quiet people, which I was and still am to variable levels, an everyday struggle for me. Some would be amazed at the different ways my siblings and I either sought attention constantly or shunned it as dangerous.
But I read their prophet Elizabeth communications from some Saint I think, called 'Pearls of Wisdom'. (In the seventies my younger sister wanted to convert me and sent them to me along with some of their books. (I kind of wish I kept them since these sisters' memories on the hate teachings is gone.) A big No-No to share those with someone outside the cult then, that was. It only opened my eyes up to the dangers of religion and the many ways of preaching militantancy in the name of god.
One of my 3 sisters that were, and 2 still are to varying degrees, in the Super Militant Lighthouse Cult from the 70s told me to only read that one.
I know that in my reading of the Bible, I understood why she said NO. Both testaments, being written by men, are full of contradictions and justifications and then at one point someone writes "Oh, but really that's not acceptable."
I remember a Nun teaching the class that we must not lie even if you're hiding your parents from Nazis or Zionists if they ask you where they are. (Now that I think on it, that was a self serving instruction) I remember even to this day that I went home thinking BS. Of course I was only in first grade, so I may not have thought exactly that. ;-)
Oh yeah, I remember you mentioning in another comment section some few months ago about the Lighthouse Cult part. As to apparent contradictions in the Bible, I *think* I also understand where those perceptions come from; I'll always be happy to clarify passages that *appear* to run into head-on collision with each other.
> "I remember a Nun teaching the class that we must not lie even if you're hiding your parents from Nazis or Zionists if they ask you where they are"
Hmm... did they imply anything along the explicitly articulated lines of "the end justifies the means," from what you would recall? Randomly curious on this.
I don't think so. She was teaching the commandments and that we must'nt break them, but giving False Witness (I believe that is the definition of what the Empire's quislings do.) is not equivalent to not answering or misleading someone that seeks to do harm. I do think her example was a self serving and wrong (collaborators come to mind) even if she didn't consciously intend it. Think of the setting. A class of children you must control, that will betray each other may have been useful.
Very interesting. From what you're describing, I can't help but analytically think this "ends justify the means" concept is ever-subtly incorporated in implication even if not explicitly stated, in the case of your Catholic teacher this underlying notion that -- yes, exactly as you articulate in this "hypothetical" setting -- if the broader "common good" is being served, then other otherwise-objectionable qualms would be a secondary concern? (though do correct me if you believe I'm misunderstanding your descriptive recollections) The reason I bring this up is because historically the Jesuits were widely accused of teaching their initiates this doctrine yet publicly denied it, and Monita Secreta (a.k.a. "Secret Oath of the Jesuits") also contains this phrase. Some few weeks ago I found this resource apparently documenting the Jesuit history of teaching this (https://archive.org/details/endjustifiesmean00hurl), though haven't found the time and motivation to read it in full, as of typing.
...first off, appreciate your expressed sincerity as always, Orestes; I agree with your first part absolutely about the Democrats' and neocon GOP's corruption.
On the issue of abortion: whether your provided statistic is accurate, I'm not certain ATM as of typing because I haven't closely checked this debate in a "very long" while. What I certainly remember nonetheless is that even first-trimester abortions are a highly gruesome scene, so respectfully I have fundamental moral reservations about a "woman's right" encompassing an intrinsic "right" to unilaterally determine whether her child should live or face dismembering. Though I see where you're coming from, so assuming you're as sincere on this issue as you can be on the truth and light you're living up to, let's possibly return to this topic a bit later if that's alright with you.
Yes, absolutely concurred: I also completely want to vomit upon the sight of Democrats simultaneously claiming to represent "human rights" while disregarding the plight of the Palestinian people. As to your proposal about a Palestinian State expelling Zionists, I absolutely wish that was a possibility, but sadly reality's heading in a different direction... cf. my previous postings i.e. "25 predictions for '25."
The Democrats and Republicans alike are controlled by a singular cabal, so at whatever moment in time one side will play the role of "conspicuous"/obvious boogeyman and the other as the false (pretend) savior. The Johannite/Templar occultists who run the world (not "the Jews" as some falsely insist) follow a traditional dualist ideology in accordance with the old yin-yang because "there is nothing new under the sun." IMO it shows an incredibly awesome conscience on your part to contact your "representatives" on these issues, though unfortunately they will not listen... whatever hearts and decency they had were bought and sold a long time ago.
Indeed, costs are racking up and become ever-increasingly insane. Some while ago I was joking to a friend that eventually restaurants will start charging extra for using napkins.
> "eschewing concerts, athletic events, or activities any activity where they gouge the hell out of you"
Good call, Orestes. From my observation, everyday people at those venues and "entertainment" events aren't worth being around anyways, and seeing how frequent these psyop terrorist attacks occur, IMO they're absolutely not worth it at this rate.
> "I can’t fathom going to a friend’s house unannounced, we’re so consumed with a life prioritized by consumerism"
Sorry to hear that; I think I can relate to this feeling of simply feeling too internally "guilty" about overly asking friends for help to that extent. Reminds me of some insane decisions I made in the past few months...
I 100% can relate to your anger on these issues, and here's my cautionary note of summary in the meantime, Orestes: be careful about how future psyops/manipulators will try to "co-opt" your anger to line you behind a seemingly "utopian" agenda. Zionism and globalism constitute the "problem" end of the problem-reaction-solution framework, and therefore were intended by DESIGN decades/centuries ahead of time to cause humanity to become so fed up with them that we will eventually become manipulated into accepting the New World Order's *ACTUAL* despotic agenda disguised as "anti-Zionism" and/or "anti-globalism" in the very end, causing us to fall into the last and biggest trap of them all.
As to how right-wingers think? Well, on Substack here I talk to a few (a.k.a. the ones who I've checked over and over and are certain have the sterling integrity to fully recognize and distantiate themselves from unsavory "alt-right" types), and can say that a large bulk of them are as sincere as you and like-minded left-wing anti-imperialists are. Cf. my recent post about ending the left-right division among us anti-establishment dissidents. I'll try to address your individual points the best I can...
"as the conversation takes a turn to 'teachers indoctrinating kindergartens, giving them hormones for gender reassignment purposes'"
IMO some of that is a genuine concern. The level of "gender insanity" is not a made-up crisis but a serious issue I've read about. You are right to critique the way right-wingers frenzy over this, but here's the real catch that both mainstream left and mainstream right don't understand: the conspiracy all along was that the NWO introduces the "gender fluidity extremism" intentionally to drive society into the "cultural far left" until even people at the center and liberal-leaning sides become fed up enough to support "any seeming end to this leftist insanity," a.k.a. endorsing the mangomonger theocrats. It's problem-reaction-solution: the Jesuit global controllers create the "leftist" problem to cause Western populations lining up behind "far-right" counterreaction second fronts which install the final Jesuit agenda. So when right-wingers harp over these "left-wing extremism" issues, they're not fundamentally wrong about the existence of these problems, but what they are naive and stupid on is the fact that the typical "direction" of their emotionally charged ranting -- that leads them to endorse right-wing politicians and their platforms as "the only solution against all this leftist anarchy" -- proves these right-wingers fell hook, line, and sinker for the Jesuit psyop and are ripe for the picking when the final deception arrives in full force.
"women giving birth to babies and allowing them to abort them"
I know the MSM claims such things don't exist, though a) there was a serious issue of whether infanticide was permitted by Northam at Virginia, for one, and b) we have reached the point in society where swaths of young women view their unborn children as disposable "parasites" and think they have the "right" after orgies to evade all responsibility and dismember their child as if THEIR OWN CHILDREN means nothing to them. If the majority of America believes this mentality is acceptable, is it no wonder people are so cruel to each other?
"DEI hire every time a minority gets a job"
While I see what you're getting at, I think this assessment is a stretch sometimes. The only right-wingers who believe this entirely are the utter idiots and/or racist degenerates totaling zero intelligence to bother providing a cover. Speaking as someone of an ethnic minority myself, I've observed all too common that liberal-minded non-whites undermine their own ostensible impressions by endorsing certain "woke" views/policies on race. The racial dimension is too complex and time-consuming for me to explain here and now though, seeing my reply is already this long...
"immigrants living the high life in 5 star hotels, flown in from developing countries by democrats seeking votes"
See, this yet again highlights what I mean about problem-reaction-solution: I don't think it's so much that these allegations are entirely hoaxes/made-up, though potentially exaggerated. And that's the whole point: the NWO causes the "leftist extremist insanity" on purpose to make the population so fed up that they are willing to endorse the right-wing extremist program cynically co-opting these grievances.
Thanks, Orestes, hope you take care as well in this insane world we live in, and agreed, may Palestine be free. Feel more than welcome to message me if you ever need someone to talk to.
Orestes V., you're correct. Neoliberalism kills any Republic or democracy because that's it's intent. It was well known back in the early times of organized civilizations that super wealthy were destructive to country. That's why usery laws are found in religious texts of all faiths. It's one reason Greek and Roman and other empires collapsed. I'm not sure the British empire collapsed, it may have just changed hands or names. Those civilizations didn't control wealth distribution.
I don't believe and there's plenty of evidence that anyone before Nixon, or is it Reagan, made it everybody's business for a wedge issue. It simply is NOT. All of this 'private laundry' stuff shouldn't be on the public stage or anyone else's business. That's goes for sexual choices or any of the manufactured divisive issues. Just stick to the Constitution as NOT interpreted by Christian courts or law makers. The Constitution have US freedom of choice and the rest. The Constitution shouldn't be a buffet or menu where one person can choose what they like and then force it on others. Freedom Of Choice, Period. All the changes in the age of progress, which is well over now, were made to Enforce the Constitution, take the Constitution out of the hands of zealots.
By the way, I didn't hear Democracts complaining about loosing their 1st Amendment Rights. Just endorsing taking them away. Another thing Mr Reich may not be caring about. I know this will soon change, but we've lost more First Amendment protections under this passing administration then under previous. Here in this state the Democrats are passing a law that will allow towing companies to keep vehicles they tow, more legalized theft.
There's more, but I wanted to say that there's more reasons to not trust the 'moderate' left. After all it was a left president and his brother that were assassinated before he could force the Zionists to register as foreign agents after they, the CIA and others in and out of the 'Democratic' administration have nuclear tech and secrets to Zionists. In fact it's was a democratic president that covered up for Zion when they attempted to murder the entire crew of the USS LIBERTY. However, keep in mind both parties have been shilling for Oligarchs and Neoliberalism for a long long time.
Hello, Ellen, wonderful to see you around again; hope you're as well as can be. As to "neoliberalism," whether Rome fell because its economy was too "laissez-faire" and oligarchist is actually interesting now that you bring it up. On a possibly(?) relevant note, AFAIK its economy must've been decimated during the Great Crisis of the Third Century concurrent to Rev. 8:8-9's mention of the "third part of the ships destroyed" since "ships" = economics. (cf. Ezek. 27:25) This of course goes into a whole slew of historicist Christian eschatology probably better saved for elsewhere in detail eventually...
Yes, you're absolutely on the right track about the British empire and I've been pondering this in the past few months also: its goal was to create a Zionist occupation regime in Palestine, and once that was accomplished the central "focus" would shift to the Middle East and remove Britain itself from the "chief spotlight." The Masonic/occultic monarchy of Britain continues as insiders, but outwardly its direct activity is "reduced" in common public perception into an "assisting" role, though God knows just how ultra-"pivotally" important they still remain since the MI6 and CIA are powerfully vital propagators of whatever geopolitical agenda the Knights of Malta order them to achieve.
OK, on the "social issue" of abortion, if I recall correctly: a) traditionally the idea of abortion-on-demand the way it's propagated today presumably would've been met with horror in past generations and b) the Protestant majority of America back then viewed organized opposition to abortion as a "Catholic issue." The question here on individual liberty pertains to whether this implies an unborn child is human and has a right to live or not. But I know these are rather "sensitive" topics, so I won't debate this further since ATM there's much larger pictures to focus on in this time-dissipating world...
> "didn't hear Democracts complaining about loosing their 1st Amendment Rights. Just endorsing taking them away"
Yeah, and unfortunately the Republicans aren't any better sometimes. Both toxic "mainstreams" love Kool-Aid-binging echo chambers where they endlessly project their own guilt on anyone who disagrees with them.
> "in this state the Democrats are passing a law that will allow towing companies to keep vehicles they tow"
Hold up, what?! I certainly didn't hear about this...
Anyways, notwithstanding a bit of apparent differences over some social issues, I definitely concur with everything else you're saying, Ellen: the "liberals"/"moderate left" 100% are not trustworthy because they've conclusively proven last year November that they selfishly prioritize quenching first-world inconveniences to the point of disregarding a f---ing Holocaustic Judeo-SS genocide against Palestine. And yes, exactly: both "mainstream" establishments bootlick for depravity.
Once again -- just wanted to say -- absolutely glad seeing you around, Ellen. In these coming months I hope to rapidly explain what's going on and why in this seemingly nonsensically absurd world. Beware the long-term effects of this current "MAGA civil war"... I'm highly certain ATM that this is a manufactured manipulation scheme to create an unholy "left-right anti-establishment" synthesis which will then be consolidated into bootlicking for the final culmination of the "New" World Order. Will try to explain this in detail sometime later this month... not sure if you also noticed my "25 predictions for '25" Stack in case it might be of interest for you as food for thought.
Emmanuel, thank you for your well wishes. I do happen to get temporarily 'derailed' at times. We all have something to contend with I believe.
I appreciate your attention to my opinions on Rome and Neoliberism. I see where Neoliberism would get the Roman Empire to declare Catholicism as the State religion for it's useful power structure. An organization like Catholicism would appear very useful to a leader losing control of his Empire, but in your postulation the Empire may have been the useful tool.
I must admit that while I've read the Bible, it was a bit more then forty years ago. I read it to understand why my Therapist at the time told me she was no longer a Jew because their Holy Book advocated for such horrible things in god's name. I will have to get my hands on a Bible (my preference) or just access those passages online (I know they're easily brought up).
I actually don't deny what you are saying, I just don't have the mental muscles for it yet. I've been thinking on it since you posted it months ago. At first it was too far for me. Ironic that I was raised a Catholic, went to a Catholic school for two years and then on to the after school specials in Catholicism at the church, but really don't know much about the book, just that everything's a sin ;-). I hope to get clarity on what you're posting.
I've only gotten to my geopolitical view over the last four or less years. It took a lot of purging and shutting off of identifiable incorrect inflow of managed information and searching and finding Substack to get me this far. I'm fortunate I was open to doing that because I've read Chalmers Johnson, Tuchman and others throughout the last fifteen or more years. Of course those books were introductions to the bigger picture I barely grasp today.
Thank you for the links and explanations, also.
Delighted to hear, and you're of course more than welcome, Ellen. To my own admission, I probably ought to pray for you and some other friends in my Substack "circle" far more frequently, seeing my spiritual life is wont for slouchiness on a weekly basis and prayers get "difficult" to concentrate on.
Just curious, do you have a copy of the KJV? I strongly recommend making sure you have a solid translation to go off of, as almost every modern mainstream version is demonstrably corrupted in its subtle wording alterations littered especially across the New Testament. Speaking of which, this month I will see what I can get done analyzing translation variations and compiling some nice statistics + explained differences in some lengthy compilations.
So by "holy book" in the context of your therapist's leaving their "Jewish" identity, if I understand correctly, "holy book" there is a reference to the Hebrew Bible/Old Testament? AFAIK (just to restate in case, as I don't know if I explicitly went over this with you in previous discussions) there's no intrinsic contradiction between the Old and New Testaments, because this illusion is *exactly* what the NWO deception is trying to push at the religious level. (though even when it comes to the Talmud, the question of whether rabbinic/Talmudic/Pharisaic writings push horrendous discrimination/bigotry is questionable, because actual devoutly Talmudic "Jews" i.e. Neturei Karta reject these forms of racism, as it's in actuality cabalistic/occultic teachings from Babylonian-derived "Kabbalah" that propagates these "special chosen racial people" doctrines).
Wow, you were raised Catholic? Interesting; here's a brief summary of what I've most recently been able to make out of the Catholic system: at some "semi-insider" level they completely reject entire books of the New Testament, while at the outmost level they pretend those books line up with Catholic teaching. I'm talking especially about the three Pastoral Epistles (I Timothy, II Timothy, Titus) by Paul, which in their reliable Textus Receptus/King James reading debunks various ascetic, dualist, and Gnostic teachings "quietly" seeped in Catholicism. One of the Catholic Church's most prized manuscripts is the 4th-century Alexandrian text Codex Vaticanus (or "Codex B"), which leaves out the Pastoral Epistles entirely. Yet at the outer level to pretend three entire letters aren't canonical would draw too much suspicion to the outside world, so in the Latin Vulgate and subsequently translated Douay-Rheims Bible, the "Catholic" insider Jerome simply modified all those "problematic" passages in the Pastorals which were contrary to Catholic teaching.
Some few months ago I did a comprehensive analysis of Paul's letters, and when I divided in each book/set of books the number of KJV/Vulgate deviations over the total number of verses, I found that in Paul's ten "main" letters the average was about 3-4%, in Hebrews it was about 10-11% (if I recall correctly), and in the Pastorals it was ~14-15%. So this shows that -- very subtly -- the Catholic Bible reflects the same bias of the "insider" Vaticanus manuscript in taking problem with the teachings of Paul in the Pastoral Epistles, albeit at a subtler, sneakier level so most people don't even realize because it flies right over their heads.
Here's a spoiler Catholicism doesn't tell its laity: the emphasis on "chastity" and super-strict standards which turn into everyday killjoys are only for the "outside" "catechumen" because the insiders believe something completely different. Insider Catholic doctrine is hardly different from the "Marcionite" radical Gnostic doctrines of the 2nd century (they believed that nothing done in the flesh applied to the spirit, so one can commit horrific crimes and it doesn't matter so long as you "gained esoteric knowledge"), the only difference being that Marcionism wasn't actually "fully Gnostic" in nature because it openly gave its Gnostic teachings to the outside world, while in actual Gnostic structures the "true Gnostic inner teachings" are only reserved for the highest of the hierarchy's initiated cultists. So for example, Catholicism co-opts the Pastoral's emphasis on seemingly strict standards for women and turns it into a subjugation at its "traditionalist"/ultraconservative levels, yet it shares with Marcionism this idea that women are exalted when celibate. Marcionism simply propagated this to everyone and said all women should be celibate from sex/marriage, while Catholicism reserves this privilege for the initiated nuns while in utmost duplicity telling the lower ranks of Catholic women that their role is "kitchen and childbearing," pretending when making the pitch to the "outside" "masses" that Catholicism elevates women for staying in the house to their confined burdens (even though in the long run it's the exact opposite -- the "lower rankings" of women in the Dark Ages and modern "traditionalist"/ultraconservative Catholicism are regarded as second-class citizens when they submit to their told "duty of childbearing"). By completely polar contrast, the early Christian church -- in line with Mosaic Judaism -- emphasized compassion and sympathetic consideration for women's needs at an individual level and bestowed great honor for those taking selfless roles of community leadership guiding family and local brethren unto edified sanctification in shared communion with God.
I typed Holy Book instead of what my Therapist might have said at the time. I couldn't remember what book she called out, but already knew of the horrors advocated for in the SJV of the First Testament.
My mother had ten children because she was devout in her way. (I think she only could remembered the 'Don'ts' of her Mother's teachings because I don't remember her preaching any of the 'Do's'.) The only reason the number of children was limited to ten was that my father went and got a vasectomy after trying to use condoms or any method to stop the annual baby blossom. My mother would not, under any circumstances, allow for regulation of the number of children.
I laugh at my father thinking he could sneak condom use past my mother or a box of 'balloons' past a horde of kids. I can imagine the anger on Mom's face seeing us throw those water bombs at each other.
SJV? Hmm, for whatever reason, I'm not familiar with that acronym. Though if it's the Hebrew Bible, as it sounds like so far, then I broadly understand the typical concerns as it relates especially to Joshua-Judges. At face value it can look as if the Hebrews during the time of Joshua were brutal mass murderers, though the Fifth Book of Moses says:
"Not for thy righteousness, or for the uprightness of thine heart, dost thou go to possess their land: but for the wickedness of these nations the LORD thy God doth drive them out from before thee, and that he may perform the word which the LORD sware unto thy fathers, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob." (Deut. 9:5)
Since the same Torah also forbids the mistreatment of strangers (Ex. 23:9), shedding of innocent blood (Deut. 19:10), and also expressly prohibits abhorrence of Edomites and Egyptians (Deut. 23:7) for reasons respectively of brotherhood and refuge status, this means that when God ordained Joshua's slaughter campaigns, they were against nations which were exceedingly wicked in sanctioned societal practices.
"Who is a God like unto thee, that pardoneth iniquity, and passeth by the transgression of the remnant of his heritage? he retaineth not his anger for ever, because he delighteth in mercy." (Mic. 7:18)
"The Lord is slow to anger, and great in power, and will not at all acquit the wicked: the Lord hath his way in the whirlwind and in the storm, and the clouds are the dust of his feet." (Nah. 1:3)
Wow, what a journey growing up that must've been for you!
> "I can imagine the anger on Mom's face seeing us throw those water bombs at each other"
Ah, this is too funny! 😂
Thank you, and I respect your courteously stated differences of opinion on these issues. As to the Jesuit-Masonic conspiracy, there are some links between those two elements subtly indicated in these sources:
- "Secret Behind Secret Societies" by Walter Veith (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eDrscByKEUQ&list=PL95B1BB23B7A3C795&index=10)
- "Treason in America" by Anton Chaitkin (goes over the bit of Jesuit/Masonic convergence during the 1800s: https://archive.org/details/treasoninamerica00chai)
- various articles from EIR i.e. this (https://larouchepub.com/eiw/public/1989/eirv16n08-19890217/eirv16n08-19890217_058-knights_of_malta_launch_a_crusad.pdf)
- what occultist Helena Blavatsky admitted in "Isis Unveiled" (https://www.google.com/books/edition/Isis_Unveiled_a_Master_Key_to_the_Myster/QCu0nRn3Xq0C?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=blavatsky+%22general%22+jesuit+scottish+rite&pg=PA390&printsec=frontcover)
Well, you need to remember that what people commonly think of as "Roman Catholicism" is not actually what the highest levels of Catholicism actually follows -- in all clandestine NWO operations running outwardly sugar-coated organizations/ideologies, the ideology/system propagated to the outside world is an invented halfway "fake" completely different in pretense from the activity/ideology of the "insiders." In the case of Catholicism, the highest insiders all know that it is not merely "high church Christianity" but actually Johannism, which is itself a disguise for Satanism. At the outside level the Johannite dimension is disguised as veneration and honoring of "St. John the Baptist" or "St. John the Evangelist," but at the inside level they know that the figure being honored/venerated is actually the old pagan deity Janus, the two-headed being. The two heads represent occultic dualism, and at the highest initiation levels therefore represent the two sides of the devil: his "light" side as Lucifer and his "dark" side as Satan. This conclusion is something I individually arrived at some time ago after a bit of study and consideration.
The military wing of the Catholic Church -- the Jesuit Order and its Knights of Malta partners -- control the machinations of every major global institution behind a facade of proxies obeying dictates from whatever their superiors instruct them to do. So to answer your question, YES: the Jesuit/Maltese power definitely has more power than the Episcopalians and Zionists.
First off, Episcopalianism: since it's a mainstream Protestant denomination, this means the Jesuit front organization used to hijack it is Freemasonry. The Superior General of the Jesuit Order controls the 32nd/33rd degrees of Scottish Rite Freemasonry and its initiated members, so the orders are handed down to the lower echelons of Masonic proxies who influence what is taught and preached at the Protestant denominations, which then is seeped into the pastors who themselves probably have no idea they are NOT teaching what the Bible says.
As to Zionism: while I know this might be hard to believe, the fact of the matter is that all pretense of "Jewish control" is an illusion. The "Jews" do not fundamentally control institutions by their own will and decision-making; the highest levels of their fraternities and "representing" organizations i.e. B'nai B'rith and the ADL are dictated to them by even higher-ranking (and non-Jewish) entities, but their bosses are kept secret from public view while the "court Jew" proxies at prominent institutions are publicly known for their influence, so this by design makes sure beguiled bigots will blame "the Jews" for what the Jesuit-Masonic cabal is guilty of. Now, exactly how the Jesuits control Israeli society through which "line" of proxies, I don't know for certain. What is certain AFAIK is that the British imperial axis ever since its existence as a global oppressing power has been doing the bidding of the Jesuit Order this whole time. Therefore when the British paved the way for Zionist successes in 1948, this was done at the behest of Jesuit aims in the Middle East to whip up a final cataclysm.
Now, yes: the Vatican itself has publicly never fully embraced Zionism and argued that Jerusalem should be internationalized. This is how duplicitous the Jesuits/Vatican are: since they are the inheritors of the old Knights Templar tradition and therefore want Jerusalem for themselves, they brainwash/hoodwink "the Jews" into violently wresting Palestine from Arab control and hand its control over to a Jesuit-manipulated "Zionist" government. Once Zionism serves its purpose and could be swept out of the way, the Vatican will take Jerusalem for itself and declare it a fully internationalized center for all religions to unite together behind the pontiff. IOWs, the Jesuits quietly and pragmatically support "Zionist" extremism only so the pendulum eventually swings in the other direction and they then co-opt "anti-Zionism" to justify their *ACTUAL* agenda.
The everyday individual Catholics do not know what their church's highest levels are up to, because they're just used as pawns by their pontiff to prop up the Catholic hierarchy without any idea exactly what system they're sustaining.
Oh, as to SCOTUS, it's controlled by the Sovereign Military of Malta and Opus Dei. The "right-wing" justices there were pushed into the Court by SMoM/OD operative Leonard Leo, who's involved with Project 2025.
Yeah, I understand, it's a v e r y difficult matter to grasp in full, believe me. I'll try to break it down a bit what I can...
> "it explains that Ignatius Loyola was a Jew that established the order of the Jesuits. Pretty much a hack that manipulated the Vatican"
Oh, boy... here's my recommendation, and FYI I don't fault you on this because I know you're curious and scouring around: don't pay ANY attention to these claims of "Jewish control of Jesuits," because that's an age-old psyop tactic. The Jesuit Order has zero legitimate "Jewish" origin and -- quite to the contrary -- have from their inception been virulently opposed to Judaism, banning Jews by "ancestry" from joining the Order; promoting ultramontane Catholic hatred of Jewish people throughout Europe; attacking the Jewish foundation of Christianity, namely the seventh-day Sabbath (which the 1st-century Apostles observed; Jesus's disciples did NOT observe the pagan day of the sun a.k.a. "Sunday").
See, here's the thing: genuine critics of Jesuitism will never push antisemitic canards, because us longtime researchers (as you may recall, RigbyRigbyson is also a fantastic expert) into Jesuit tentacles understand that "Jewish control" canards have always been invented by Rome to blame "the Jews" for what they -- the papists -- are guilty of. Therefore the "Jewish Jesuit" theory is nothing more than a fifth column ruse to align anti-Jesuit researchers behind false narratives as a diversion tactic.
> "they were big on liberation theology in the Americas. Which was diametrically different from what you espoused in your post"
Yes. My point in that previous discussion was that the Jesuits control both the "left" liberation theology/Marxist dimension AND also the "right" neofascist/neo-Nazi dimension in those Latin American countries, and therefore the Marxist side did not constitute any meaningful opposition to neofascist terrorism because for one, the existence of a Marxist/Communist party provided a perfect "foil" whereby the neo-Nazis could claim they were there to "fight the threat of Marxist Communism." If lower rankings of the Jesuits were liquidated in the process, that would've been 100% because a) as a distracting PR ploy to make people believe "the Jesuits are genuinely opposed to fascism," and b) the lower rankings of the Jesuit Order are disposable in the eyes of their superiors and therefore can be sacrificed to accomplish the broader end agenda because "the ends justify the means"; cf: https://archive.org/details/endjustifiesmean00hurl
> "Any truth to this claim of Loyola being Jewish and manipulating the Vatican"
...no. Absolutely disregard people who propagate such claims that the Jesuits constituted "Jewish infiltration of the Vatican from the outside," because that's pure bogus pushed by malicious coadjutors and deceivers who either are duped or have no interest in the truth.
> "So Johannism comes from St John the Baptist, right? He disguises as Satan since or a twisted version of him does it?"
Uh... maybe you're almost on the right track here... I'll try to explain with further clarity. So Johannism in terms of its ACTUAL ideology (NOT what they claim to the outside world) doesn't come from John the Baptist nor John the Apostle. They only PRETEND like it does to the outside world or to the lower initiates of their order as a ruse.
Johannism only pretends to be based off of "St. John" in a Christian garb to the outside world and masses who do not know what lurks behind the curtain. Because at the insider level the highest initiates all know that this "Johann"/"John" they venerate is NOT John the Baptist nor John the Apostle, rather the pagan deity Janus which represents Satan.
It's the deity Janus -- faked/masked under a rebranded image as "St. John" to the outside world -- which represents Satan, not the actual John the Baptist nor John the Apostle.
Think about it this way, if it helps: you know how the Nazis weren't "real socialists" and only pretended to be socialists to trick socialists, right? Likewise, Johannism has nothing to do with the real John the Baptist nor John the Apostle of Christianity, but only co-opts this "St. John" image to the outside world to trick everyday Catholics and Christians broadly.
> "The Knight of Malta acts as a humanitarian agency, they do it to carry out their seemingly nefarious agenda?"
Yes, with a catch: remember what I said about how these occultic/clandestine agencies have "two sides," one sanitized fake image for the outside world and the true evil teachings reserved for the "inner circle"? It's the same way with the Sovereign Military Order of Malta (SMoM): their "humanitarian charity" is only for the outer realm to make the masses believe they're propagating Catholic concepts of gracious, selfless charity. At the inside level they are 100% a clandestine, sinister organization. The Knights of Malta control the Anglo-American intelligence agencies since at least the Cold War, since I recall both the FBI and CIA were founded by members of the Knights of Malta. (such high-ranking Catholics in the U.S. are of course loyal to the Roman pontiff and not to America)
The Knights of Malta funded the right-wing extremist governments of South America during the Cold War, and alongside Opus Dei are the stringpullers of Trumpist extremism here in America -- Project 2025 goes right back to the KoM and Opus Dei.
> "One last question as I need to get going? Why are the Scots so influential in carrying out their agenda? That’s why they hate the Catholics so much in Northern Ireland?"
Hmm... I can understand why you're asking the question. FYI it's not about the ethnic group themselves associated with these agendas, rather the agendas themselves, because so long as someone is successfully propagating the higher Satanic echelons' bidding, that's all that matters to those high-ranking occult insiders. I don't know much about that ethnic conflict, but all you really need to know in the utmost simplest terms for now is that on the outside, these religious/ethnic clashes over time are manipulated into "dialectical" controlled wars, because at the insider level it doesn't matter to the highest initiates which direction they come from to ascend up the cone/pyramid -- whichever side they approach from, so long that tippy-top is approached at the end (since to them "the end justifies the means," as I mentioned above), it leads to the same deep-seated occultic insider knowledge anyways.
> "So , if Zionists are being manipulated are the English the main perpetrators of the Palestinian genocide? "
Yes and no: the Zionist Judeonazis at the end of the day -- whether beguiled or not -- are still responsible for the war crimes and lakes of blood they have on their hands. The "English"/Anglo-Masonic structure indeed is absolutely guilty of sponsoring/stringpulling this Zionazi imperialist regime into existence, though remember: the Anglo-Masonic British power structure is controlled by the Jesuits and/or Knights of Malta, since Britain is a longstanding central seat of Scottish Rite Freemasonry, and the highest SR Freemasons take orders from the Superior General of the Jesuits.
> "Thanks my dear Emmanuel, as you can see I’m confused and perplexed, perhaps the most I’ve been since I realized Santa, the Easter Bunny and the Tooth Fairy were not real!!"
Absolutely more than welcome, Orestes, my friend; if this response of mine still needs clarification on any parts, feel completely welcome to let me know on what more I can clarify, because so long as you are willing to listen and understand what's going on, I will take the hours of time it will consume out of my day to explain what I can to you.
If one is all about beating Trump or beating republicans, that exactly turns one into them. Why? The other side to them can be just as bad, actually even worse, and Reich will support them. This is how Reich exactly supports those he most vociferously criticizes. People who are Zionist yet “critical” of Israel aren’t really critical of Israel at all. Again they have no principles and pretend like Israel is genocidal due to bad leaders. It’s just bad luck, otherwise Zionism is great. It’s like, Naziism would be fantastic but for Hitler.
Exactly; a Republican is someone who walks by a homeless person with no regard, while a Democrat will exploit their downtrodden status to promote themselves as saviors of the poor while doing next-to-nothing meaningful to help that person. (unless of course that homeless person is a Palestinian resident of Gaza whose home got bombed by a Judeo-SS missile funded by Ku Klux Kamala, because then the Democrat wouldn't even pretend to care since "tEh sItUaShOn iZ KomPlEkS aNd mY pRoBlEmz ArE mOre iMpoRtAnT")
Yes. I also believe the Republican vs Democrat Party thing is a ruse in that both are playing the 'Good cop, Bad cop' game to soften up the populace for horrible legislation. Horrible legislation is proposed by Republicans cue uproar, then Democrats get the majority, but simply have to pass similar* horrible legislation because 'whatever reason' cue grudging acceptance.
*Tweaked to make it appear less onerous
Yeah, it turns from "right is right and wrong is wrong" into "right is when my side does it and my side can basically do no wrong whatsoever!"
- "Drink cherry Kool-Aid because blue raspberry is poisoned with cyanide!"
- "Drink blue raspberry Kool-Aid because cherry is poisoned with arsenic!"
This reminds me, a number of times I see these so-called "leftists" with an inherent liberal-shilling mentality lamenting why they got "betrayed," and after I explain to them that both sides are the outward dialectical propagators of a unified conspiracy, I get no response or they are drunk on denialism insisting "their" side is immune to any form of outside manipulation. It turns out that sadly too many people *seemingly* on the right track on the utmost basic moral issues don't truly care about a) understanding the practical truth as to where the problem comes from at its root and b) how to actually alleviate them; their preoccupation is believing idealistic "woke" dogmas.
I notice commonly that large swaths on the "left" who never abandoned that old "liberal shill" mentality come to technically the correct end conclusions: that Trump is a menace to America, that racism and poor race relations are a societal problem, etc. etc. Yet their reasoning for *why* they think that way is flawed, and when I explain to them that both the "right-wing" menace and "left-wing" mainstream counterreaction are controlled opposition, they refuse to accept the truth no matter how much evidence I show them that "right-wing extremists" are Jesuit/Knights of Malta-controlled intelligence puppets, that "white supremacy" is the outward propagation of Scottish Rite Freemasonic networks, that "woke" neo-Marxism is the product of combined Jesuit/Communist subversion, that Trump is a Jesuit puppet, that CRT-esque explanations of racial tensions don't do anything to improve race relations, etc. etc.
My democratic siblings won't even consider Biden's mental incapacity as true even though the WSJ published a big exposé on it not long ago.
Now that's denialism or 'capture', when the information comes from an accepted 'News Organization' such as that and they still can't think it.
Yeah, the level of shilling is truly insane when it comes to these people thinking "the other side is an imminent threat to this country so my side must be voted in no matter what!!" I've seen similar levels of lunacy on the right i.e. my next-door elderly Republican neighbor once screeching at me as I was talking to his grown son about how Trump is a controlled stooge of the NWO and that "mainstream politics" is a dialectical delusion.
Some people won't let facts intrude past their echo chamber walls they build and (may or may not) expect others to pay for.
Lol, others to pay for.
My Trump supporting sibling (never saw a cult she didn't like) got real angry when I referred to the D + R candidate supporters as Blue and Red MAGAs. She said only Trump supporters are MAGAs. I rolled my eyes and refrained from saying that I was referring to the level of cultish behavior, the devotion to their own created image of that which they worship and hatred of 'others'.
Here's a funny teaching from their cult; they were taught that Jupiter is a spaceship and that the Japanese were aliens from another planet, not Jupiter spaceship. Also anybody not white is not an acceptable human. I loved listening to their stories while they were seeking to convert me. I kept a straight attentive face, but I never repeated the insanity of they beliefs. I don't like gossip, I've seen the damage it does. I guess it's sometimes wise that people don't trust shy quiet people, which I was and still am to variable levels, an everyday struggle for me. Some would be amazed at the different ways my siblings and I either sought attention constantly or shunned it as dangerous.
But I read their prophet Elizabeth communications from some Saint I think, called 'Pearls of Wisdom'. (In the seventies my younger sister wanted to convert me and sent them to me along with some of their books. (I kind of wish I kept them since these sisters' memories on the hate teachings is gone.) A big No-No to share those with someone outside the cult then, that was. It only opened my eyes up to the dangers of religion and the many ways of preaching militantancy in the name of god.
Great piece Emmanuel.
That was very evident great man and well done. BTW who in the fuck is this Linda O? I can’t find her on my following list.
Thanks, George! Decided to go with a bit of sardonic "humor" on this post. :)
Chat GPT: garbage in, garbage out.
Oh, the S is a typo...K.
One of my 3 sisters that were, and 2 still are to varying degrees, in the Super Militant Lighthouse Cult from the 70s told me to only read that one.
I know that in my reading of the Bible, I understood why she said NO. Both testaments, being written by men, are full of contradictions and justifications and then at one point someone writes "Oh, but really that's not acceptable."
I remember a Nun teaching the class that we must not lie even if you're hiding your parents from Nazis or Zionists if they ask you where they are. (Now that I think on it, that was a self serving instruction) I remember even to this day that I went home thinking BS. Of course I was only in first grade, so I may not have thought exactly that. ;-)
Whoops, my bad for missing that first part.
Oh yeah, I remember you mentioning in another comment section some few months ago about the Lighthouse Cult part. As to apparent contradictions in the Bible, I *think* I also understand where those perceptions come from; I'll always be happy to clarify passages that *appear* to run into head-on collision with each other.
> "I remember a Nun teaching the class that we must not lie even if you're hiding your parents from Nazis or Zionists if they ask you where they are"
Hmm... did they imply anything along the explicitly articulated lines of "the end justifies the means," from what you would recall? Randomly curious on this.
I don't think so. She was teaching the commandments and that we must'nt break them, but giving False Witness (I believe that is the definition of what the Empire's quislings do.) is not equivalent to not answering or misleading someone that seeks to do harm. I do think her example was a self serving and wrong (collaborators come to mind) even if she didn't consciously intend it. Think of the setting. A class of children you must control, that will betray each other may have been useful.
Very interesting. From what you're describing, I can't help but analytically think this "ends justify the means" concept is ever-subtly incorporated in implication even if not explicitly stated, in the case of your Catholic teacher this underlying notion that -- yes, exactly as you articulate in this "hypothetical" setting -- if the broader "common good" is being served, then other otherwise-objectionable qualms would be a secondary concern? (though do correct me if you believe I'm misunderstanding your descriptive recollections) The reason I bring this up is because historically the Jesuits were widely accused of teaching their initiates this doctrine yet publicly denied it, and Monita Secreta (a.k.a. "Secret Oath of the Jesuits") also contains this phrase. Some few weeks ago I found this resource apparently documenting the Jesuit history of teaching this (https://archive.org/details/endjustifiesmean00hurl), though haven't found the time and motivation to read it in full, as of typing.
Yes. As I was answering I thought that in a managed populace the powerful would teach this as a virtue, very useful and manipulative.
Alright, whew, that's a hefty amount to unpack...
...first off, appreciate your expressed sincerity as always, Orestes; I agree with your first part absolutely about the Democrats' and neocon GOP's corruption.
On the issue of abortion: whether your provided statistic is accurate, I'm not certain ATM as of typing because I haven't closely checked this debate in a "very long" while. What I certainly remember nonetheless is that even first-trimester abortions are a highly gruesome scene, so respectfully I have fundamental moral reservations about a "woman's right" encompassing an intrinsic "right" to unilaterally determine whether her child should live or face dismembering. Though I see where you're coming from, so assuming you're as sincere on this issue as you can be on the truth and light you're living up to, let's possibly return to this topic a bit later if that's alright with you.
Yes, absolutely concurred: I also completely want to vomit upon the sight of Democrats simultaneously claiming to represent "human rights" while disregarding the plight of the Palestinian people. As to your proposal about a Palestinian State expelling Zionists, I absolutely wish that was a possibility, but sadly reality's heading in a different direction... cf. my previous postings i.e. "25 predictions for '25."
The Democrats and Republicans alike are controlled by a singular cabal, so at whatever moment in time one side will play the role of "conspicuous"/obvious boogeyman and the other as the false (pretend) savior. The Johannite/Templar occultists who run the world (not "the Jews" as some falsely insist) follow a traditional dualist ideology in accordance with the old yin-yang because "there is nothing new under the sun." IMO it shows an incredibly awesome conscience on your part to contact your "representatives" on these issues, though unfortunately they will not listen... whatever hearts and decency they had were bought and sold a long time ago.
Indeed, costs are racking up and become ever-increasingly insane. Some while ago I was joking to a friend that eventually restaurants will start charging extra for using napkins.
> "eschewing concerts, athletic events, or activities any activity where they gouge the hell out of you"
Good call, Orestes. From my observation, everyday people at those venues and "entertainment" events aren't worth being around anyways, and seeing how frequent these psyop terrorist attacks occur, IMO they're absolutely not worth it at this rate.
> "I can’t fathom going to a friend’s house unannounced, we’re so consumed with a life prioritized by consumerism"
Sorry to hear that; I think I can relate to this feeling of simply feeling too internally "guilty" about overly asking friends for help to that extent. Reminds me of some insane decisions I made in the past few months...
I 100% can relate to your anger on these issues, and here's my cautionary note of summary in the meantime, Orestes: be careful about how future psyops/manipulators will try to "co-opt" your anger to line you behind a seemingly "utopian" agenda. Zionism and globalism constitute the "problem" end of the problem-reaction-solution framework, and therefore were intended by DESIGN decades/centuries ahead of time to cause humanity to become so fed up with them that we will eventually become manipulated into accepting the New World Order's *ACTUAL* despotic agenda disguised as "anti-Zionism" and/or "anti-globalism" in the very end, causing us to fall into the last and biggest trap of them all.
As to how right-wingers think? Well, on Substack here I talk to a few (a.k.a. the ones who I've checked over and over and are certain have the sterling integrity to fully recognize and distantiate themselves from unsavory "alt-right" types), and can say that a large bulk of them are as sincere as you and like-minded left-wing anti-imperialists are. Cf. my recent post about ending the left-right division among us anti-establishment dissidents. I'll try to address your individual points the best I can...
"as the conversation takes a turn to 'teachers indoctrinating kindergartens, giving them hormones for gender reassignment purposes'"
IMO some of that is a genuine concern. The level of "gender insanity" is not a made-up crisis but a serious issue I've read about. You are right to critique the way right-wingers frenzy over this, but here's the real catch that both mainstream left and mainstream right don't understand: the conspiracy all along was that the NWO introduces the "gender fluidity extremism" intentionally to drive society into the "cultural far left" until even people at the center and liberal-leaning sides become fed up enough to support "any seeming end to this leftist insanity," a.k.a. endorsing the mangomonger theocrats. It's problem-reaction-solution: the Jesuit global controllers create the "leftist" problem to cause Western populations lining up behind "far-right" counterreaction second fronts which install the final Jesuit agenda. So when right-wingers harp over these "left-wing extremism" issues, they're not fundamentally wrong about the existence of these problems, but what they are naive and stupid on is the fact that the typical "direction" of their emotionally charged ranting -- that leads them to endorse right-wing politicians and their platforms as "the only solution against all this leftist anarchy" -- proves these right-wingers fell hook, line, and sinker for the Jesuit psyop and are ripe for the picking when the final deception arrives in full force.
"women giving birth to babies and allowing them to abort them"
I know the MSM claims such things don't exist, though a) there was a serious issue of whether infanticide was permitted by Northam at Virginia, for one, and b) we have reached the point in society where swaths of young women view their unborn children as disposable "parasites" and think they have the "right" after orgies to evade all responsibility and dismember their child as if THEIR OWN CHILDREN means nothing to them. If the majority of America believes this mentality is acceptable, is it no wonder people are so cruel to each other?
"DEI hire every time a minority gets a job"
While I see what you're getting at, I think this assessment is a stretch sometimes. The only right-wingers who believe this entirely are the utter idiots and/or racist degenerates totaling zero intelligence to bother providing a cover. Speaking as someone of an ethnic minority myself, I've observed all too common that liberal-minded non-whites undermine their own ostensible impressions by endorsing certain "woke" views/policies on race. The racial dimension is too complex and time-consuming for me to explain here and now though, seeing my reply is already this long...
"immigrants living the high life in 5 star hotels, flown in from developing countries by democrats seeking votes"
See, this yet again highlights what I mean about problem-reaction-solution: I don't think it's so much that these allegations are entirely hoaxes/made-up, though potentially exaggerated. And that's the whole point: the NWO causes the "leftist extremist insanity" on purpose to make the population so fed up that they are willing to endorse the right-wing extremist program cynically co-opting these grievances.
Thanks, Orestes, hope you take care as well in this insane world we live in, and agreed, may Palestine be free. Feel more than welcome to message me if you ever need someone to talk to.