?Vatican II affirms Catholic doctrine dating back to 1302, ['Unam Sanctam'], when Pope Boniface VIII asserted that ?it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff.?
This was the inspiration for the papacy to create the United States of America that materialized in 1776, by a process just as secret as the Reagan- Vatican production of Eastern Europe in 1989. What? American government Roman Catholic from the beginning??
?Consider: the land known today as the District of Columbia bore the name ?Rome? in 1663 property records; and the branch of the Potomac River that bordered ?Rome? on the south was called ?Tiber? (Scharf, History of Western Maryland, Baltimore (1882), p. 27-30).
?This information was reported in the 1902 edition of the Catholic Encyclopedia's article on Daniel Carroll. The article, specifically declaring itself ?of interest to Catholics? in the 1902 edition, was deleted from the New Catholic Encyclopedia (1967).
?Other facts were reported in 1902 and deleted from the 1967. For example, when Congress met in Washington for the first time, in November, 1800, ?the only two really comfortable and imposing houses within the bounds of the city? belonged to Roman Catholics. One was Washington's first mayor, Robert Brent. The other was Brent's brother-in-law, Notley Young, a Jesuit priest.?
?Daniel Carroll was a Roman Catholic congressman from Maryland who signed two of America's fundamental documents, the Articles of Confederation and the United States Constitution. Carroll was a direct descendant of the Calverts, a Catholic family to whom King Charles I of England had granted Maryland as a feudal barony. Carroll had received his education at St. Omer's Jesuit College in Flanders, where young English-speaking Catholics were trained in a variety of guerrilla techniques for advancing the cause of Roman Catholicism among hostile Protestants.?
?In 1790, President George Washington, a Protestant, appointed Congressman Carroll to head a commission of three men to select land for the ?federal city? called for in the Constitution. Of all places, the commission chose ?Rome,? which at the time consisted of four farms, one of which belonged to ...Daniel Carroll. It was upon Carroll's farm that the new government chose to erect its most important building, the Capitol.?
?The American Capitol abounds with clues of its Roman origins. ?Freedom,? the Roman goddess whose statue crowns the dome, was created in Rome at the studio of American sculptor Thomas Crawford. We find a whole pantheon of Roman deities in the great fresco covering the dome's interior rotunda: Persephone, Ceres, Freedom, Vulcan, Mercury, even a deified George Washington. These figures were the creation of Vatican artist Constantino Brumidi.?
?The fact that the national Statehouse evolved as a ?capitol? bespeaks Roman influence. No building can rightly be called a capitol unless it's a temple of Jupiter, the great father-god of Rome who ruled heaven with his thunderbolts and nourished the earth with his fertilizing rains. If it was a capitolium, it belonged to Jupiter and his priests.?
?Jupiter's mascot was the eagle, which the founding fathers made their mascot as well. A Roman eagle tops the governing idol of the House of Representatives, a forty-six-inch sterling silver-and-ebony wand called a ?mace.? The mace is ?the symbol of authority in the House.? When the Sergeant-at-arms displays it before an unruly member of Congress, the mace restores order. Its position at the rostrum tells whether the House is in ?committee? or in ?session.?
?America's national motto ?Annuit Coeptis? came from a prayer to Jupiter. It appears in Book IX of Virgil's epic propaganda, the Aeneid, a poem commissioned just before the birth of Christ by Caius Maecenas, the multi-billionaire power behind Augustus Caesar. The poem's objective was to fashion Rome into an imperial monarchy for which its citizens would gladly sacrifice their lives.?
?Fascism may be an ugly word to many, but its stately emblem is apparently offensive to no one. The emblem of fascism, a pair of them, commands the wall above and behind the speaker's rostrum in the Chamber of the House of Representatives. They're called fasces, and I can think of no reason for them to be there other than to declare the fascistic nature of American republican democracy. A fasces is a Roman device.
?Actually, it originated with the ancient Etruscans, from whom the earliest Romans derived their religious jurisprudence nearly three thousand years ago. It's an axe-head whose handle is a bundle of rods tightly strapped together by a red sinew. It symbolizes the ordering of priestly functions into a single infallible sovereign, an autocrat who could require life and limb of his subjects. If the fasces is entwined with laurel, like the pair on the House wall, it signifies Caesarean military power. The Romans called this infallible sovereign Pontifex Maximus, ?Supreme Bridgebuilder.? No Roman was called Pontifex Maximus until the title was given to Julius Caesar in 48 BC. (See William Branham, An Exposition of the Seven Church Ages, p. 197). Today's Pontifex Maximus is Pope John Paul II.?
?...John Paul does not hold that title alone. He shares it with a mysterious partner, a military man, a man holding an office that has been known for more than four centuries as ?Papa Nero,? the Black Pope... the House fasces represent the Black Pope, who indeed rules the world? (Tupper Saussy, Rulers of Evil
?It is not hard to understand what immense force must belong to the heads of this society, and how the general of the Jesuits could say to the Duke de Brissac: ?From this room, your grace, I govern not only Paris, but China; not only China, but the whole world, and all without any one knowing how it is done? (Constitution of the Jesuits, edited by Paulin, Paris, 1843).
Here is another impression of the image to the beast. ?We are told that we won the Gulf War. What is not yet perceived by the vast majority of Americans is that, in winning the war, it cost the self respect and honor of our nation. That lies rotting in the desert sands of Kuwait and Iraq, alongside the corpses of the Iraqi soldiers we butchered in the agreed retreat from Kuwait and Basra; we could not keep our word that we would abide by the Geneva Conventions and not attack them. ?What do you want,? our controllers asked us, ?victory or self respect? You can't have both.?
One hundred years ago, this could not have happened, but now it has happened and excites no comment. We have succumbed to the long range penetration warfare waged against this nation by Tavistock. Like the German nation, defeated by the Prudential Bombing Survey, enough of us have succumbed to make this nation the kind that totalitarian regimes of the past would have only envisaged in their dreams. ?Here,? they would say, ?is a nation, one of the largest in the world, that doesn't want the truth. All of our propaganda agencies can be dispensed with. We don't have to struggle to keep the truth from this nation, they have willingly rejected it of their own volition. This nation is a pushover.?
King of kings' Bible; Isaiah 30:8 Now go, write it before them in a table, and note it in a Book, that it may be for the time to come for ever and ever: 30:9 That this [is] a rebellious people, lying children, children [that] will not hear The Law of the ?I AM:? 30:10 Which say to the Seers, See not; and to the Prophets, Prophesy not unto us right things, speak unto us smooth things, prophesy deceits (lies): 30:11 Get you out of The Way, turn aside out of the path, cause the Holy One of Israel to cease from before us. 30:12 Wherefore thus saith the Holy One of Israel, Because ye despise this Word, and trust in oppression and perverseness, and stay thereon: 30:13 Therefore this iniquity shall be to you as a breach ready to fall, swelling out in a high wall, whose breaking cometh suddenly at an instant.
?Our once proud Republic of the United States of America became no more than a series of criminal front organizations, which history shows is always the start of totalitarianism. This is the stage of permanent alteration we were at in America as 1991 drew to a close. We live in a throw-away society, programmed not to last. We do not even flinch at the 4 million homeless nor the 30 million jobless, nor the 15 million babies murdered thus far. They are ?throw-aways? of the Age of Aquarius, a conspiracy so damnable that, when first confronted with it, the majority will disavow its existence, rationalizing these events as ?times have changed.?
?This is how the Tavistock Institute and Willis Harmon programmed us to react. Dismantling of our ideals goes on without protest. The spiritual and intellectual drive of our people has been destroyed! On May 27th, 1991, President Bush made a very profound statement, the thrust of which appears to have been totally misused by most political commentators:
?The moral dimension of American policy requires us to chart a moral course through a world of lesser evils. That is the real world, not black and white. Very few moral absolutes.? What else could we expect from a President who is most probably the most evil man ever to occupy the White House?
?Consider this in the light of his order to the military to bury alive 12,000 Iraqi soldiers. Consider this in the light of his ongoing war of genocide against the Iraqi people. President Bush was delighted to characterize President Saddam Hussein as the ?Hitler of our times.? He never bothered to offer a single scrap of proof. It was not needed. Because President Bush made the statement, we accepted it without question. Consider this in the bright light of truth, that he did all of these things in the name of the American people while secretly taking his orders from the Committee of 300.?
?But, more than anything else, consider this: President Bush and his controllers feel so secure that they no longer deem it necessary to hide their evil control of the American people, or to lie about it. This is self-evident in the statement that he, as our leader, will make all manner of compromises with truth, honesty and decency if his controllers (and ours) deem it necessary.
?On May 27th, 1991, the President of the United States abandoned each and every principle embodied in our Constitution and boldly proclaimed that he was no longer bound by it. This is a great victory for the Tavistock Institute and the Prudential Bombing Survey, whose target changed from German worker housing in 1945 to the soul of the American people in a war that began in 1946 and runs through the 1990s? (Dr. John Coleman, Conspirators' Hierarchy: The Story of The Committee of 300, p. 116-118).
According to Eric Jon Phelps in Vatican Assassins (p. 632), ?The Jesuit General has been the most powerful man in the world since Pius VII restored the Order or ?Company? in 1814. Because of the Order's suppression by the Pope in 1773, the Jesuits began the Bavarian Illuminati with one of their soldiers, Adam Weishaupt. The Illuminati absorbed the Jewish House of Rothschild creating a colossus of wealth around the world, subject to the Jesuit General. With this financial arm in place the Jesuits then made war on the Vatican including the Pope, the Roman Catholic Monarchs of Europe and the Order of the Dominicans. This Inquisition and Crusade was called ?the French Revolution and Napoleonic Wars?. For twenty-five years, the Jesuit General's Masonic agents, particularly in the person of Napoleon Bonaparte, conducted war. Bonaparte also punished the Knights of Malta, driving them from their island home to Russia.?
Clearly the Jesuits are in league with the House of Rothschild, and Napoleon was their dupe. However I believe the Rothschilds and the Council of Thirteen have mastery over ?the Company.? and that it was Rothschild who engaged and financed Weishaput to revive the Illuminati. King Rothschild's secret society is more numerous and powerful than the Society of Jesus; both abhor, yet owe allegiance to Rome. At the appropriate time the Jesuits will install the man of their choice in the chair of St. Peter, as in the past they have removed incumbents who displeased them.
?The effect of Mayer Amschel Rothschild's will was to establish the kingdom of the Jews that has since been governed by his male descendants. Wherever a Jew is located, whatever nationality he may claim, he is a subject of this kingdom; his allegiance and duty to it supersedes his allegiance and duty to the country in which he dwells? (George
Armstrong, Rothschild Money Trust, p.24).
?The Rothschilds govern a Christian world. Not a cabinet moves without their advice. They stretch their hand, with equal ease, from Petersburg to Vienna, from Vienna to Paris, from Paris to London, from London to Washington. Baron Rothschild, the head of the house, is the true king of Judah, the prince of the captivity, the Messiah so long looked for by this extraordinary people...The lion of the tribe of Judah, Baron Rothschild, possesses more real force than David; more wisdom than Solomon? (Anka Muhlstein, Baron James, The Rise of the French Rothschilds).
King of kings' Bible - Revelation 2:9 I know thy works, and tribulation, and poverty, (but thou art rich) and [I know] the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are NOT, but [are] (Idumeans) the synagogue of Satan.
The Treaty of Paris of 1763 designated King
George III ?Arch-Treasurer and Prince Elector
of the Holy Roman Empire.? And ?according to
the Encyclopedia Judaica the Rothschilds bear
the title ?Guardians of the Vatican Treasury.?
The Vatican Treasury, of course, holds the
imperial wealth of Rome. Imperial wealth grows
in proportion to its victories in war; as
the Jesuit empowerment Regimini militantis
ecclesiae implies, the Church-at-War is more
necessary than the Church-at-Peace. According
to H. Russell Robinson's illustrated Armour of
Imperial Rome, Caesarean soldiers protect
themselves in battle with shields painted red.
?Since the soldiery is the State's most
valuable resource (the Council of Trent
admitted this in preferring the Jesuits to all
other religious orders), it is easy to
understand why the red shield was identified
with the very life of the Church. Hence, the
appropriateness of the name Rothschild, German
for ?red shield.?
?The appointment of Rothschild gave the black papacy absolute financial privacy and secrecy. Who would ever search a family of orthodox Jews for the key to the wealth of the Roman Catholic Church? I believe this appointment explains why the House of Rothschild is famous for helping nations go to war. It is fascinating that, as Meyer Rothschild's sons grew into the family business, the firm took on the title Meyer Amschel Rothschild und Sohne, which gives us the notariqon MARS. Isn't Mars the Roman God of War, whose heavenly manifestation is ?the red planet?? There is powerful. Cabala here, and there's hardly an acre of inhabitable earth that hasn't been affected by it in some way. (Tupper Saussy, Rulers of Evil. p. 160-161).
?In the final words of his book The Vatican Empire, Nino Lo Bello states, ?While the Vatican has remained secretive about its fiscal policy, it has never believed that the investment of Church money was either illegal, objectionable in principle, or contrary to good conscience. In seeking to resolve the conflict between that which is to be rendered to God and that which is to be rendered to Caesar, the Vatican has developed its own special modus vivendi between the sacred and the secular. The view of the pope as a kind of chairman of the board may shock some readers. But let us remember that the Vatican is a remarkable, centuries-old institution, and that, when it comes to money, it is one that is fully in tune with the spirit of the times.?
?This writer foresees the day, perhaps a thousand years from now, when the Vatican will cease functioning as a religious institution and take up, on a full-time basis, the duties of a large-scale business corporation.
?The transition will not be as difficult to effectuate as one might suspect. For just as Catholicism will decline and eventually withdraw from the ranks of the major religions, so, too, will Church money find its way into nearly every area of the free world's economy. Then, at last, the tycoon on the Tiber will shed the mantle of piety; then, at last, the Vatican will expose the full extent of its financial interests? (Nino Lo Bello, The Vatican Empire, p. 185-186).
?Rome is a beast in sheep's clothing. Her false religion is merely a ?front? whereby she has disarmed the world whilst she steals the absolute power of one world government.
?The Vatican owns hundreds of banking companies in its own right but likes to maintain its funds in numbered Swiss bank accounts, one reason...is because the Swiss franc can provide protection against inflation and devaluation...the Swiss franc is guaranteed up to 130 percent by gold. So, because Switzerland's money is ?hard money,? the Vatican holds francs and exchanges them for the legal tender of another country when needed? (Ibid, pp.118-119).
?Early in the 19th century the Pope approached the Rothschilds to borrow money. The Rothschilds were very friendly with the Pope, causing one journalist to sarcastically say ?Rothschild has kissed the hand of the Pope...Order has at last been re-established. (Derek Wilson, Rothschild: The Wealth and Power of a Dynasty, p. 101).
Researcher Eustice Mullins writes that the Rothschilds took over all the financial operations of the worldwide Catholic Church in 1823 (The Curse of Canaan, p.125). Today the large banking and financial business of the Catholic Church is an extensive system interlocked with the Rothschilds and the rest of the International Banking system. The great wealth of the Russian Czars was entrusted to the Rothschilds, $35 million with the Rothschild's of England, and $80 million in the Rothschild's Paris bank. The Rothschilds financed the Russian Revolution which confiscated vast portions of the Orthodox Church's wealth. They have been able to prevent (due to their power) the legitimate heirs of the Czars fortune to withdraw a penny of the millions deposited in a variety of their banks. The Mountbattens (aka Windsors - QE2*), who are related to the Rothschilds, led the court battles to prevent the claimants from withdrawing any of the fortune.
?In other words, the money they invested in the Russian Revolution, was not only paid back directly by the Bolshevists in millions of dollars of gold, but by grabbing the huge deposits of the Czars' wealth, the Rothschilds gained what is now worth over $50 Billions (Mullins, Eustice, The World Order, p.5).
?A number of rich Catholics undertook to organize a competitor bank to rival the Rothschild power...sometime about 1830. The Rothschilds crushed it. The Jewish Encyclopedia (Vol. 2, p. 497) admits that:
?Following the failure of the Catholic bank, Union Generals, leaving the Rothschilds still more absolutely the disputed leaders of French finance, but leaving also a legacy of hatred which had much influence on the growth of the anti-Semitic movement in France.?
It says further:
?It is a somewhat curious sequel to the attempt to set up a Catholic competitor to the Rothschilds that at the present time (1905) the latter are the guardians of the papal treasure.?
If this latter statement is true the Rothschilds control in addition to their own fortune the immense liquid resource of the Catholic Church, which is second only to the Rothschilds' in wealth and power. It is probably not literally true since the private banking firm did not do commercial banking. It is likely that the papal treasure is deposited with the Bank of England or some other bank ?front,? but even so it contributes to the Rothschild power? (George Armstrong, Rothschild Money Trust, p. 42).
Thirteen families control the policy-making and decisions of the central banks in the world's leading nations, in which they are the majority shareholders. And the US dollar is the standard against which all other currency is measured. They also control the banks which practice fractional reserve banking; sometimes without any reserve. The legal practice of the banks permits them to loan 20:1 against their deposits.
?When we look at the list of banks which cooperated with the very looters of the Vatican Bank during the looting, it reads like a roster of the banks of the Secret Empire: the Rothschilds (both Paris and London), Hambros Bank of London, J.P. Morgan, Marine Midland, Lloyds, National Westminster, the Morgan Guaranty, Banker's Trust, Chase Manhattan, Continental Illinois...etc. What! The Secret Empire co-operating to loot the world banking system? That makes no sense!
?But it was not the Secret Empire banks which suffered the big losses. It was the depositors and stockholders of all the banks swindled. Any losses were deducted against taxes, swindling the taxpayers. And the Vatican later agreed to pay $250 million in exchange for being released from any culpability by the world banking system, which, of course, was paid by the humble, faithful flock...the looting of the Vatican Bank...could not have been carried out without the co-operation of the international bankers...? (Cushman Cunningham, The Secret Empire, p. 317, 586).
Meanwhile, Americans sit themselves before the television set and simply absorb what it projects to them. The three major networks which are under Rothschild direction.
Link Provided: www.geocities.com/Athens/Atrium/2012/
