CHAPERS 1-8 OF " RULERS OF EVIL " BY TUPPER SAUCY

CHAPERS 1-8 OF " RULERS OF EVIL " BY TUPPER SAUCY

FORMERLY GIVEN FREE FROM HIS WEBSITE AS A LONG PREVIEW OF HIS BOOK WHICH IS ACTUALLY MANY MORE CHAPTERS PLEASE IF YOU BUY HIS WHOLE BOOK SCAN AND SHARE IT VIA 4SHARED.COM OR RAPIDSHARD OR THEPIRATEBAY OR EMULE ETC AS IT IS ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE TO FIND THIS BOOK WITHOUT BUYING IT. ALSO SINCE HE'S DEAD NOW I'M SURE HE DOESN'T MIND. CHEERS! Chapter 1. “The Roman Catholic Church is a State.” — BISHOP MANDELL CREIGHTON, LETTERS SUBLIMINAL ROME NOTE: For footnotes and illustrations, see hard-cover edition. When a Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter announced in his 1992 Time Magazine cover story that a “conspiracy” binding President Ronald Reagan and Pope John Paul II into a “secret, holy alliance” had brought about the demise of communism, at least one reader saw through the hype. Professor Carol A. Brown of the University of Massachusetts fired off a letter to Time’s editors saying, Last week I taught my students about the separation of church and state. This week I learned that the Pope is running U.S. foreign policy. No wonder our young people are cynical about American ideals. What Brown had learned from Carl Bernstein I had discovered for myself over several years of private investigation: the papacy really does run United States foreign policy, and always has. Yes, Bernstein noted that the leading American players behind the Reagan/Vatican conspiracy, to a man, were “devout Roman Catholics” – namely, William Casey (Director, CIA), Richard Allen (National Security Advisor), Judge William Clark (National Security Advisor), Alexander Haig (Secretary of State), Vernon Walters (Ambassador-at-Large), and William Wilson (Ambassador to the Vatican State). But the reporter neglected to mention that the entire Senate Foreign Relations committee was governed by Roman Catholics, as well. Specifically, Senators Joseph Biden (Subcommittee on European Affairs), Paul Sarbanes (International Economic Policy, Trade, Oceans, and Environment), Daniel P. Moynihan (Near Eastern and South Asian Affairs), John Kerry (Terrorism, Narcotics, and International Communications) and… Christopher Dodd (Western Hemi-sphere and Peace Corps Affairs).

Bernstein would have been wandering off-point to list the Roman Catholic leaders of American domestic policy, such as Senate majority leader George Mitchell and Speaker of the House Tom Foley. In fact, when the holy alliance story hit the stands, there was virtually no arena of federal legislative activity, according to The 1992 World Almanac of US Politics, that was not directly controlled by a Roman Catholic senator or representative. The committees and subcommittees of the United States Senate and House of Representatives governing commerce, communications and telecommunications, energy, medicine, health, education and welfare, human services, consumer protection, finance and financial institutions, transportation, labor and unemployment, hazardous materials, taxation, bank regulation, currency and monetary policy, oversight of the Federal Reserve System, commodity prices, rents services, small business administration, urban affairs, European affairs, Near Eastern & South Asian affairs, terrorism/narcotics/ international communications, international economic/trade/ oceans/environmental policy, insurance, housing, community development, federal loan guarantees, economic stabilization measures (including wage and price controls), gold and precious metals transactions, agriculture, animal and forestry industries, rural issues, nutrition, price supports, Food for Peace, agricultural exports, soil conservation, irrigation, stream channelization, floodcontrol, minority enterprise, environment and pollution, appropriations, defense, foreign operations, vaccines, drug labeling and packaging, drug and alcohol abuse, inspection and certification of fish and processed food, use of vitamins and saccharin, national health insurance proposals, human services, legal services, family relations, the arts and humanities, the handicapped, and aging – in other words, virtually every aspect of secular life in America – came under the chairmanship of one of these Roman Catholic laypersons: Frank Annunzio Joseph Biden Silvio Conte Kika De la Garza John Dingell Christopher Dodd Vic Fazio James Florio Henry Gonzalez Thomas Harkin Edward Kennedy John Kerry John LaFalce Patrick Leahy Charles Luken Edward Madigan Edward Markey Joseph McDade Barbara Mikulski George Miller Daniel Moynihan John Murtha Mary Rose Oakar

David Obey Claiborne Pell Charles Rangel Dan Rostenkowski or Edward Roybal. Vatican Council II’s Constitution on the Church (1964) instructs politicians to use their secular offices to advance the cause of Roman Catholicism. Catholic laypersons, “whoever they are, are called upon to expend all their energy for the growth of the Church and its continuous sanctification,” and “to make the Church present and operative in those places and circumstances where only through them can it become the salt of the earth” (iv, 33). Vatican II further instructs all Catholics “by their competence in secular disciplines and by their activity [to] vigorously contribute their effort so that … the goods of this world may be more equitably distributed among all men, and may in their own way be conducive to universal progress in human and Christian freedom … and [to] remedy the customs and conditions of the world, if they are an inducement to sin, so that they all may be conformed to the norms of justice and may favor the practice of virtue rather than hinder it” (iv, 36). Vatican II affirms Catholic doctrine dating back to 1302, 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.” 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 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 silverand- 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. Today’s Pontifex Maximus is Pope John Paul II. As we shall discover in a forthcoming chapter, 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. I shall present evidence that the House fasces represent the Black Pope, who indeed rules the world. Later, I will develop what is sure to become a controversial hypothesis: that the Black Pope rules by divine appointment, and for the ultimate good of mankind. Chapter 2. MISSIONARY ADAPTATION

Few people seem to be aware that the Roman Catholic Church in America is officially recognized as a State. How this came about makes interesting reading. Early in his administration, President Ronald Reagan invited the Vatican City, whose ruling head is the Pope, to open its first embassy in Washington, D.C. His Holiness responded positively, and the embassy, or Apostolic Nunciature of the Holy See, opened officially on January 10, 1984. Shortly thereafter, a complaint was filed against President Reagan at U.S. District Court in Philadelphia by the American Jewish Congress, the Baptist Joint Committee on Public Affairs, Seventh Day Adventists, the National Council of Churches, the National Association of Evangelicals, and Americans United for Separation of Church and State. The plaintiffs sought to have the Court declare that the administration had unconstitutionally granted to the Roman Catholic faith privileges that were being denied to other establishments of religion. On May 7, 1985 the suit was thrown out by Chief Judge John Fullam. Judge Fullam ruled that district courts do not have jurisdiction to intervene in “foreign policy decisions” of the executive branch. Bishop James W. Malone, President of the U.S. Catholic Conference, praised Judge Fullam’s decision, noting that it settled “not a religious issue but a public policy question.” The plaintiffs appealed. The Third Circuit denied the appeal, noticing that “the Roman Catholic Church’s unique position of control over a sovereign territory gives it advantages that other religious organizations do not enjoy.” The Apostolic Nunciature at 3339 Massachusetts Avenue N.W. enables Pontifex Maximus to supervise more closely American civil government – “public policy” – as administered through Roman Catholic laypersons. (One such layperson was Chief Judge Fullam, whose Roman Catholicism apparently escaped the attention of the plaintiffs.) This same imperium ran pagan Rome in essentially the same way. The public servants were priests of the various gods and goddesses. Monetary affairs, for example, were governed by priests of the goddess Moneta. Priests of Dionysus managed architecture and cemeteries, while priests of Justitia, with her sword, and Libera, blindfolded, holding her scales aloft, ruled the courts. Hundreds of priestly orders, known as the Sacred College, managed hundreds of government bureaus, from the justice system to the construction, cleaning, and repair of bridges (no bridge could be built without the approval of Pontifex Maximus), buildings, temples, castles, baths, sewers, ports, highways, walls and ramparts of cities and the boundaries of lands. Priests directed the paving and repairing of streets and roads, supervised the calendar and the education of youth. Priests regulated weights, measures, and the value of money. Priests solemnized and certified births, baptisms, puberty, purification, confession,

adolescence, marriage, divorce, death, burial, excommunication, canonization, deification, adoption into families, adoption into tribes and orders of nobility. Priests ran the libraries, the museums, the consecrated lands and treasures. Priests registered the trademarks and symbols. Priests were in charge of public worship, directing the festivals, plays, entertainments, games and ceremonies. Priests wrote and held custody over wills, testaments, and legal conveyances. By the fourth century, one half of the lands and one fourth of the population of the Roman Empire were owned by the priests. When the Emperor Constantine and his Senate formally adopted Christianity as the Empire’s official religion, the exercise was more of a merger or acquisition than a revolution. The wealth of the priests merely became the immediate possession of the Christian churches, and the priests merely declared themselves Christians. Government continued without interruption. The pagan gods and goddesses were artfully outfitted with names appropriate to Christianity. The sign over the Pantheon indicating “To [the fertility goddess] Cybele and All the Gods” was re-written “To Mary and All the Saints.” The Temple of Apollo became the Church of St.Apollinaris. The Temple of Mars was reconsecrated Church of Santa Martina, with the inscription “Mars hence ejected, Martina, martyred maid/ Claims now the worship which to him was paid.” Haloed icons of Apollo were identified as Jesus, and the crosses of Bacchus and Tammuz were accepted as the official symbol of the Crucifixion. Pope Leo I decreed that “St. Peter and St. Paul have replaced Romulus and Remus as Rome’s protecting patrons.” Pagan feasts, too, were Christianized. December 25 – the celebrated birthday of a number of gods, among them Saturn, Jupiter, Tammuz, Bacchus, Osiris, and Mithras – was claimed to have been that of Jesus as well, and the traditional Saturnalia, season of drunken merriment and gift-giving, evolved into Christmas. Bacchus was popular in ancient France under his Greek name Dionysus – or, as the French rendered it, Denis. His feast, the Festum Dionysi, was held every seventh day of October, at the end of the vintage season. After two days of wild partying, another feast was held, the Festum Dionysi Eleutherei Rusticum (“Country Festival of Merry Dionysus”). The papacy cleverly brought the worshippers of Dionysus into its jurisdiction by transforming the words Dionysos, Bacchus, Eleutherei, and Rusticum into… a group of Christian martyrs. October seventh was entered on the Liturgical Calendar as the feast day of “St. Bacchus the Martyr,” while October ninth was instituted as the “Festival of St. Denis, and of his companions St. Eleuthere and St. Rustic.” The Catholic Almanac (1992 et seq) sustains the fabrication by designating October ninth as the Feast Day of Denis, bishop of Paris, and two companions identi- fied by early writers as Rusticus, a priest, and Eleutherius, a deacon martyred near Paris. Denis is popularly regarded as the apostle and patron saint of France. Playing loose with truth and Scripture in order to bring every human creature into subjection to the Roman Pontiff is a technique called “missionary adaptation.” Vatican literature explains this as “the adjustment of the mission subject to the cultural requirements of the mission object” so that the papacy’s needs will be brought “as much as possible in accord with existing socially shared patterns of thought, evaluation, and action, so as to avoid unnecessary and

serious disorganization.” Rome has so seamlessly adapted its mission to American secularism that we do not think of the United States as a Catholic system. Yet the rosters of government rather decisively show this to be the case. By far the greatest challenge to missionary adaptation has been Scripture – that is, the Old and New Testaments, commonly known as the Holy Bible. Almost for as long as Rome has been the seat of Pontifex Maximus, there has been a curious enmity between between the popes and the Bible whose believers they are presumed to head. Chapter 3. MARGINALIZING THE BIBLE Every ruled society has some form of holy scripture. The holy scriptures of Caesarean Rome were the prophecies and ritual directions contained in the ten Sibylline gospels and Virgil’s Aeneid. The Aeneid implied that every Roman’s duty was to sacrifice his individuality, as heroic Aeneas had done, to the greater glory of Rome and Pontifex Maximus. The Sibyllines, borrowing from Isaiah’s much earlier prophecy of Jesus Christ, prophesied that when Caesar Augustus succeeded his uncle Julius as Pontifex Maximus he would rule the world as “Prince of Peace, Son of God.” Augustus would issue in a “new world order,” as indeed he did. The Sibyllines and the Aeneid were so beloved by the government priests that they were considered part of the Roman constitution. The same scriptures were made part of the United States Constitution when the mottoes “ANNUIT COEPTIS” and “NOVUS ORDO SECLORUM,” taken from the Aeneid and the Sibyllines respectively, were incorporated, by the Act of July 28, 1782, into the Great Seal of the United States. The Sibyllines and the Aeneid were open only to priests and certain privileged persons. The people learned their sacred content by the trickle-down of priestly retelling. When the Old and New Testaments were adopted as the Empire’s official sacred writings they, too, were given to the exclusive care of the priests. And in accord with Roman tradition, the people learned sacred content from discretionary retelling. This had to be, for the sake of the Holy Empire. For should the people acquire biblical knowledge, they would know that Pontifex Maximus was not a legitimate Christian entitlement. Knowing this, they would not bow to his supremacy. The Empire could collapse. And so the monarchial Roman Church forcibly suppressed the Bible’s intelligent reading.

This is why the millennium between Constantine and Gutenberg is known as “the Dark Ages.” Sprinkled throughout the Empire, however, were isolated Christian assemblies who had preserved Scripture from the days of the early Church. For them the Bible invited an ongoing, personal communion with the Creator of the universe. They lived by the writings of which Rome was so jealous. By the thirteenth century, these assemblies had grown so vibrant that Pope Gregory IX declared unauthorized Bible study a heresy. He further decreed that “it is the duty of every Catholic to persecute heretics.” To manage the persecution, Gregory established the Pontifical Inquisition. The Inquisition treated the slightest departure from the life of the community as proof of direct communion with the Bible or Satan. Either instance was a sin worthy of death. Cases were prosecuted according to a strict routine. First, the inquisitors would enter a town and present their credentials to the civil authorities. In the pope’s name, they would require the governor’s cooperation. Next, the local priest would be ordered to summon his congregation to hear the inquisitors preach against heresy, which was defined as anything the least bit opposed to the papal system. A brief grace period followed the sermon, wherein the people were given an opportunity to step forward and accuse themselves of crimes. Those who did were usually punished mildly. Later, the inquisitors would receive at their lodgings unverified accusations, guaranteeing in the pope’s name the anonymity of informants. Many innocent lives were ruined by false testimony. Trials were conducted arbitrarily and secretly by tribunals consisting of the inquisitors, their staffs, and their witnesses, all concealed under hoods. The accused were never told the charges against them, and they were forbidden to ask. No defense witnesses were permitted. The accused had but one option: to confess guilt and die. Those who refused to confess (and witnesses who balked at testifying) were carried to the dungeon for torture sessions (boys under fourteen and girls under twelve exempted). Inquisitors and executioners were commanded by papal edict to show no mercy. No acquittal was ever recorded. Every fully prosecuted case ended in the death of the defendant and the forfeiture of his or her property, since it was assumed (as in American forfeiture cases since 1984) that the property was gained in sin. Sometimes the property of family members for generations to come was forfeited. These forfeitures were paid out in expenses to the scribes and executioners, half of the remainder going into the papal treasury and half to the inquisitors. Although popes and inquisitors amassed great fortunes from the Inquisition, its greatest beneficiary was, and has been, the Roman system. The Inquisition was most effective against the isolated truthseeker in an ignorant community. As communities became more literate, the Inquisition grew subtler. What brought literacy to communities was the epidemic of Bible-reading made possible by the perfection of Johannes Gutenberg’s invention of movable type.

Chapter 4. MEDICI LEARNING Gutenberg chose the Bible to demonstrate movable type not so much that the common man might be brought nearer to God, but that he and his backer, Dr. Johannes Faust, might make a killing in the book trade. Prior to 1450, Bibles were so rare they were conveyed by deed, like parcels of real estate. A Bible took nearly a year to make, commanding a price equal to ten times the annual income of a prosperous man. Johannes Gutenberg intended his first production, a folio edition of the 6th-century Latin Bible (known as the Vulgate), to fetch manuscript prices. Dr. Faust discreetly sold it as a one-of-a-kind to kings, nobles, and churches. A second edition in 1462 sold for as much as 600 crowns each in Paris, but sales were too sluggish to suit Faust, so he slashed prices to 60 crowns and then to 30. This put enough copies into circulation for Church authorities to notice that several were identical. Such extraordinary uniformity being regarded as humanly impossible, the authorities charged that Faust had produced the Bibles by magic. On this pretext, the Archbishop of Mainz had Gutenberg’s shop raided and a fortune in counterfeit Bibles seized. The red ink with which they were embellished was alleged to be human blood. Faust was arrested for conspiring with Satan, but there is no record of any trial. Meanwhile, the pressmen, who had been sworn not to disclose Gutenberg’s secrets while in his service, fled the jurisdiction of Mainz and set up shops of their own. As paper manufacture improved, along with technical improvements in matrix cutting and type-casting, books began to proliferate. Most were editions of the Vulgate. In the decade following the Mainz raid, five Latin and two German Bibles were published. Translators busied themselves in other countries. An Italian version appeared in 1471, a Bohemian in 1475, a Dutch and a French in 1477, and a Spanish in 1478. As quickly as our generation has become computer-literate, the Gutenberg generation learned to read books, and careful readers found shocking discrepancies between the papacy’s interpretation of God’s Word and the Word itself. In 1485, the Archbishop of Mainz issued an edict punishing unauthorized Bible-reading with excommunication, confiscation of books, and heavy fines. The great Renaissance theologian Desiderius Erasmus challenged the Archbishop by publishing, in 1516, the first printed edition of the Greek New Testament. He addressed the anti-Bible mentality in his preface with these words: I vehemently dissent from those who would not have private persons read the Holy Scriptures nor have them translated into the vulgar tongues, as though either Christ taught such difficult

doctrines that they can only be understood by a few theologians, or the safety of the Christian religion lay in ignorance of it. I should like all women to read the Gospel and the Epistles of Paul. Would that they were translated into all languages so that not only the Scotch and Irish, but Turks and Saracens might be able to read and know them. A Catholic monk named Martin Luther, against the advice of his superiors, plunged into the New Testament of Erasmus. He was shocked by the absence of scriptural authority for so many Church traditions. Of the seven Church Sacraments only two, Baptism and the Lord’s Supper, were grounded in Scripture. The remaining five – Confirmation, Absolution, Ordination, Marriage, and Extreme Unction – were the inventions of post-biblical councils and decrees. Luther found no scriptural mandate for celibacy of monks and nuns, or for pilgrimages and the veneration of sacred relics. The Church taught that prayer, good works, and regular participation in the Sacraments might save man from eternal damnation. Luther found this to be opposed to the teaching of Scripture. According to Scripture, only one thing can save man from the consequences of his sins: God’s grace, and that alone. The most explosive result of Luther’s Bible-reading was its attitude toward the papacy. Nowhere in Scripture could the passionate monk find that God had ordained an imperious Roman “Vicar of Christ” to rule over a vast economy based on selling rights to do evil. These rights were called indulgences. They had been a Church tradition since Pope Leo III had begun granting them in the year 800, payable in the money coined by Pope Adrian I in 780. Indulgences were floated on the Church’s credibility, rather like government bonds are issued on the credibility of states today. In 1491, for example, Innocent VII granted the 20-year Butterbriefe indulgence, by which Germans could pay 1 20th of a guilder for the annual privilege of eating dairy products even while meriting from fasting. The proceeds of the Butterbriefe went to build a bridge at Torgau.1 Rome’s indulgence economy was as extensive as America’s income tax system today. And it was every bit as fueled by the people’s trembling compliance, voluntarily, to a presumption of liability. In 1515 Pope Leo X issued a Bull of Indulgence authorizing let- ters of safe conduct to Paradise and pardons for every evil imaginable, from a 25-cent purgatory release (the dead left purgatory the instant one’s coins hit the bottom of the indulgence-salesman’s bucket) to a license so potent that it would excuse someone who had raped the Virgin Mary. For the payment of four ducats, one could be forgiven for murdering one’s father. Sorcery was pardoned for 6 ducats. For robbing a church, the law could be relaxed for only 9 ducats. Sodomy was pardoned for 12 ducats. Half the revenues from Leo’s indulgence went to a fund for the building of St. Peter’s Cathedral, and the other half to paying 40% interest rates on bank loans subsidizing the magnificent works of art and architecture with which His Holiness was establishing Rome as the cultural capital of the Renaissance. Historians have glorified Leo,

whose father happened to be the great Florentine banker Lorenzo d’Medici, by marking the sixteenth century as “the Century of Leo X.” In early 1521, Martin Luther formally protested the indulgence racket by nailing his famous Ninety-five Theses Upon Indulgences to the door of the castle church of Wittenburg. The church was said to own a lock of the Holy Virgin’s hair worth two million years of indulgences. Luther’s Theses exhorted Christians “to follow Christ, their Head, through penalties, deaths, and hells,” rather than purchase “a false assurance of peace” from Church indulgence-salesmen. Leo had Luther arrested and detained for ten months in Wartburg Castle. While in custody, Luther managed to translate the Greek New Testament of Erasmus into German. Its publication alarmed the broadest reaches of Roman authority. D’Aubigne, in his History of the Reformation, tells us that “Ignorant priests shuddered at the thought that every citizen, nay every peasant, would now be able to dispute with them on the precepts of our Lord.” Meanwhile, Leo X died. The new pope, Adrian VI, hardly eulogized Leo when confessing to the Diet of Nuremberg that “for many years, abominable things have taken place in the Chair of Peter, abuses in spiritual matters, transgressions of the Commandments, so that everything here has been wickedly perverted.” Adrian died shortly after speaking these lines, to be succeeded by the Cardinal who had been handling Martin Luther’s case all along, another Medici, Leo X’s first cousin, Giulio d’Medici. Giulio took the papal name Clement VII. Just as Leo X’s corruption had ignited Luther, Clement VII’s shrewdness determined how the Church would deal with the proliferation of Bibles. Clement was personally advised by the cagey Niccolo Machiavelli, inventor of modern political science, and Cardinal Thomas Wolsey, Chancellor of England. Machiavelli and Wolsey opined that both printing and Protestantism could be turned to Rome’s advantage by employing movable type to produce a literature that would confuse, diminish, and ultimately marginalize the Bible. Cardinal Wolsey, who would later found Christ Church College at Oxford, characterized the project as to put “learning against learning.” Against the Bible’s learning, which demonstrated how man could have eternal life simply by believing in the facts of Christ’s death and resurrection, would be put the learning of the gnostics. Gnosticism held out the hope that man could achieve everlasting life by doing good works himself. To put it succinctly, Bible-learning was Christ-centered; gnostic learning was man-centered. An enormous trove of gnostic learning had been brought from the eastern Mediterranean by agents of Clement VII’s great-grandfather, Cosimo d’Medici. Suppressed since the Emperor Justinian had piously shut down the pagan colleges of Athens back in 529, these celebrated mystical, scientific and philosophical scrolls and manuscripts flattered humanity. They taught that human intelligence was competent to determine truth from falsehood without

guidance or assistance from any god. Since, as Protagoras put it, “man is the measure of all things,” man could control all the living powers of the universe. If elected and initiated into the secret knowledge, or gnosis, man could master the cabalah – the “royal science” of names, numbers, and symbols – to create his very own divinity. Cosimo had stored huge quantities of this pagan material in his library in Florence. The Medici Library, whose final architect was Michaelangelo, welcomed scholars favored by the papacy. These scholars, not surprisingly, soon began emulating the papacy in focusing more upon humanity than upon the Old and New Testaments. So extensive was the Medici Library’s philosophical influence that even scholars today consider it the cradle of Western civilization. Martin Luther, seeing that learning against learning was the future of Christianity, voiced an “Appeal to the Ruling Classes” (1520), in which he wrote, rather prophetically: Though our children live in the midst of a Christian world, they faint and perish in misery because they lack the Gospel in which we should be training and exercising them all the time. I advise no one to place his child where the Scriptures do not reign paramount. Schools will become wide-open gates of hell if they do not diligently engrave the Holy Scriptures on young hearts. Every institution where men are not increasingly occupied with the word of God must become corrupt. It was one thing to recommend learning against learning, and quite another to manage its multiple dimensions. Learning against learning amounted to no less than making war on the Bible. To wage such a war, the papacy needed a new priestly order of pious soldiers conditioned to wield psychological weapons on a battlefield of… human thought. But first, there had to be a general. The man chosen to lead the assault on the Bible was a swashbuckling adventurer from the proud Basque country of northern Spain. Chapter 5 . APPOINTMENT AT CYPRUS His name was Iñigo de Loyola. He was born in 1491 to a rich family, youngest of eight boys, one of thirteen children. His older brother had sailed to the New World with Christopher Columbus. Iñigo served as a page in the court of King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella of Spain. He became friends with Ferdinand’s Belgian grandson, Charles Habsburg, whose other grandfather was

Holy Roman Emperor Maximilian. (The Holy Roman Emperor was a somewhat waning symbol of unity among many European kingdoms and principalities.) Charles was propelled to great authority before his twenty-first birthday by the deaths of his two grandfathers within a space of two years. From Ferdinand, Charles inherited Spain. From Maximilian, he inherited the Holy Roman Empire. Charles Habsburg was King Charles I of Spain, Emperor Charles V of Rome. He was the most powerful secular figure in Europe. And he was Iñigo’s friend. In 1518, Iñigo was part of a legation negotiating for Charles with Spain’s traditional rival, France, at the court of the Duke of Najera in Valladolid. While the summit was in session, Catherina, the Emperor’s sister, was presented to the Najera court. Iñigo fell in love with her. He was twenty-seven and she was eleven. (The Emperor was eighteen.) The match, however, was not to be. On Monday, May 20, 1521, while commanding a garrison at the Duke’s fortress in Pamplona, Iñigo was struck by a French cannonball. His right leg was shattered, and with it – since a wellshaped leg was among a courtier’s most prized assets – the prospects for a romantic life with Catherina, or any other woman. An honor guard of French soldiers bore the wounded champion on a stretcher to his family’s castle in the Spanish Pyrenees. Surgeons butchered his leg and reset the bones. He lost appetite and was told he might die. He made confession and was given last rites. But a few days after the feast of Sts. Peter and Paul, he was pronounced out of death’s immediate grasp. He credited this recovery to his devotion to St. Peter. Iñigo remained bedridden for nearly a year. Under the concerned if distant eye of the youthful Emperor, he spent his time “searching for substitutes for the shattered ideals, ambitions, and values that had been so central to his sense of himself.” He gazed obsessively at a small icon of Saint Catherine, a gift from Queen Isabella to his sister-in-law. The icon sparked dreams of Catherina, which only throttled his heart with desolation. He turned to books, Ludolph of Saxony’s Life of Christ and Voragine’s Lives of the Saints – the only two volumes in the family library despite the fact that a Spanish Bible had been available for forty years. The icon and the books gave him visions. The visions, in turn, led him to develop a process of “preparing and disposing the soul to rid itself of all inordinate attachments, and, after their removal, of seeking and finding the will of God.” Iñigo called this process “the Spiritual Exercises.” In the Exercises, a Director leads a Retreatant through Four Weeks of intense prayer, meditation, and dialogue with the Blessed Virgin Mary, Jesus, and God the Father. Frequent repetition of “Anima Christi,” Loyola’s own habitual prayer for disorientation and sensory deprivation (“Blood of Christ, inebriate me”), is advised. The First Week is spent considering and contemplating sins, creating vivid mental pictures of “hell in all its depth and breadth, putting your five senses at the service of your imagination.” The Second Week explores the life of Christ up to Palm Sunday inclusively; the Third Week undertakes the Crucifixion, in which the Retreatant is directed to “imagine Christ our Lord

present before you on the Cross, and begin to speak with him … and ask ‘What have I done for Christ? What am I doing for Christ? What ought I to do for Christ?’” The Fourth Week is occupied with the Resurrection and Ascension, after which the Retreatant prays “for a knowledge of the deceits of the rebel chief and help to guard myself against them; and also to ask for a knowledge of the true life exemplified in the sovereign and true Commander, and the grace to imitate him.” By the time the Exercises have run their course, the Retreatant’s purified imagination is totally dominated by mental pictures of Jesus resurrected, Jesus the King Militant. One can now answer the King’s call to conquer Protestantism and its rebel chief (“the enemy of human nature”) with the selfless fidelity of a chivalrous knight. One’s consciousness has been altered. One’s soul and brain have been washed. One’s liberty has been sacrificed to authority. One’s individuality has been surrendered to the Christ of Rome. One no longer has a will of one’s own. One volunteers for any assigned task no matter how adverse. Martin Luther spent Loyola’s year of recovery imprisoned at Wartburg Castle for insulting the papacy with his Ninety-Five Theses. Remarkably, while one prisoner experienced mystical visions that urged him to defend the Church’s honor in the romantically chivalrous manner of the Knights Templar, the other was translating (with the miraculous permission of his keepers) the New Testament into German so that ordinary people might learn the will of God directly. These parallel, simultaneous quests for holiness would define modern life’s underlying conflict: Which Master Do I Serve, Rome or the Word of God? Purified by the Spiritual Exercises, Iñigo’s sensual attachment to Princess Catherina was transformed through Saint Catherine into a higher, spiritual attachment to a higher femininity – to Mary, the Queen of Heaven. An apparition of the Virgin appeared to him one night and validated that he was free of fleshly lusts and was now worthy of a pilgrimage to Jerusalem. In Martin Luther’s opinion, “as far as God is concerned, Jerusalem and all the Holy Land are not one whit more, or less, interesting than the cows in Switzerland.” But to a spiritual warrior preparing to lead the Church to war against Scripture, a touchdown in Jerusalem was absolutely necessary. Jerusalem was the domain of King Solomon’s Temple, the geo-spiritual center of the Knights Templar. If Iñigo was to revive the Templars, as the Emperor desired, it was liturgically imperative that his newly-washed spirit present itself in the Sacred City for initiation into the mysteries of holy warfare. All pilgrims to the Holy Land were required by law to apply to the pope at Easter for permission to proceed. In early March 1522, more than a year in advance, Iñigo set out for Rome in all his aristocratic finery, riding on the back of a mule. The corrupt Leo X had died suddenly of malaria in December 1521, and on January 9, 1522, Charles Habsburg (King and Emperor) had engineered the nearly unanimous election of his former tutor, Adrian Dedal, to succeed Leo as Adrian VI. Iñigo headed for Rome coincidentally with Adrian’s journey across Spain to Barcelona, the point of

embarcation for voyages to Italy. The new pope stopped in Navarre, in northern Spain, for an official reception by the Duke of Najera’s successor. Iñigo, too, stopped at Navarre to do some undescribed business at the Duke’s residence at Navarette. Perhaps Adrian gave him a discreet audience. Further on, the pilgrim kept an all-night vigil at a chapel of the Virgin of Aranzazu, Protectress of the Basques, vowing his chastity to her small, dark statue. He continued on to Montserrat, where he lodged in a Benedictine abbey. There, he rededicated himself to God’s service before another statue of the Virgin, the Black Madonna of Montserrat, Protectress of Catalonia, Patroness of Christian Conquest. The spiritual exercise here must have been intense, for in the late afternoon of the third day, Iñigo traded clothes with a beggar, hung his sword and dagger on the Madonna’s shrine, and gave his mule to the abbey. While Adrian VI proceeded on to Barcelona, Iñigo detoured on foot to the village of Manresa for ten months of penances, spiritual preparation, and note-taking. Stripped of everything but sackcloth, a gourd for drinking, and a pilgrim’s staff, he adopted the lifestyle of the early Knights Templar, begging food and alms. He was initiated into the Illuminati, the “Enlightened Ones,” a secret society of gnostic fundamentalists who preached that all matter is absolutely and eternally evil. The gnostics taught that humanity itself is of Satanic origin. Adam and Eve were the offspring of devils. Humanity can achieve salvation from death and eternal punishment, however, by freeing soul from body for absorption into the pure light of Godliness. This is done by withdrawing from sensual pleasure and intuitively discovering hidden truths as conveyed by the cabalah. (The gnostics’ contempt for anything having to do with the physical side of existence translated into wildly ironic behavior. Some practiced radical celibacy because they believed the result of sexual intercourse, conception, would only imprison more souls in physical bodies. Others practiced unbridled sexual libertinism in order to prove they were completely free from all physical inhibition. Still others combined the two, pursuing hypocritical lives of celibate fornication, of which “safe sex” is the modern institution. Loyola’s particular cult apparently chose the asceticism of self-flagellation, for Iñigo wandered many nights about the Manresa countryside whipping himself with a scourge studded with iron barbs. Later in life, he would decide that the whips and barbs “sapped one’s strength,” that the Godhead could as adequately be sought by the more humane self-mortification of the Spiritual Exercises.) While Iñigo was outlining the Exercises in Manresa, Luther’s translation of the New Testament was introducing readers and listeners in Germany, Switzerland, France, Bohemia, and England to a different form of spiritual exercise, one in which God’s will, ancient and immutable, was expressed not within the private imagination but publicly, in the printed Word, for all to see. People devoured the New Testament even before it reached the bindery. In one contemporary’s words, “The sheet, yet wet, was brought from the press under someone’s cloak, and passed from

shop to shop.” The pilgrim sailed from Barcelona to the Italian port city of Gaeta, and walked the remaining distance to Rome, arriving there on Palm Sunday, March 29, 1523. Two days later, according to Vatican archives, “Iñigo de Loyola, cleric of the diocese of Pamplona” received permission from Pope Adrian VI to visit Jerusalem. From Rome, Iñigo proceeded to Venice, where one of Charles Habsburg’s agents received him graciously and introduced him to the Doge, Andrea Gritti, the highest official in Venetian civil government. A famed diplomat and linguist, Gritti arranged free passage for Iñigo aboard a small ship whose name – the “Negrona” – was appropriate for an evangelist dedicated to the Black Virgin of Christian Conquest. On July 14, 1523, the Negrona left Venice, arriving a month later at the island of Cyprus. At Cyprus, one Diego Manes and his servant, along with several Cypriot officials, boarded ship for the rest of the voyage to Haifa. Diego Manes was a Commander of the Knights Hospitallers of St. John of Jerusalem. Since 1312, the Hospitallers had held title to the vast wealth of the Knights Templar. They had been drawing upon these assets to defend the Roman economy against Islamic marauders in the east. But when the Turks attacked the Hospitallers’ headquarters on the Island of Rhodes, the assets were frozen by the pope and his former pupil, the Holy Roman Emperor Charles. No assistance in any form was forthcoming from either party. Consequently, in December 1522, the Hospitallers had no choice but to surrender Rhodes and retreat to what would become their final domicile, Malta. The message was clear. Now that Luther’s German-language New Testament was in print, Protestantism loomed a greater menace to Rome than Islam ever did. It is possible that in a Jerusalem-bound ship named Negrona, Commander Diego Manes turned over the litanies, lists, secret codes, formulae, cabalah, and other portable assets comprising the Knights Templar resources to Iñigo. If this indeed happened, the western world’s secret infrastructure was now Loyola’s to populate and manipulate in the cause of learning against learning. That is my hypothesis. What is not hypothesis is that as soon as the pilgrim returned from Jerusalem he began vesting himself with Medici learning. The idea of uniting the Templars with the Hospitallers was first argued publicly in a book published in 1305 by Raimon Llull, a renowned illuminatus from Majorca. Llull’s book, Libre de Fine, (“Free At Last”) appeared in the midst of a raging controversy between the French monarchy and the Roman papacy over who held jurisdiction over the Templars. That is the subject of our next Chapter 6. THE EPITOME OF CHRISTIAN VALUES

Since their founding on French soil in 1118, the Knights Templar had grown from a pair of self-impoverished knights hoping to keep Muslim terrorists from molesting pilgrims in the Holy Land to a mammoth organization controlling international finance and politics. The founders, Hugh de Payen and Godfroi de St. Omer, organized a group of excommunicated knight-crusaders and secured their absolution by a bishop. After placing the restored knights under oaths of poverty, chastity, secrecy, and obedience, they pledged the organization to rebuilding Solomon’s Temple. Given space adjacent to an Islamic mosque situated upon the Temple’s supposed ruins, they took the corporate name “Poor Knights of Christ and of the Temple of Solomon.” Bernard, Abbot of Clairvaux, the leading propagandist of the day, extolled the Templars as “the epitome and apotheosis of Christian values.” Bolstered by such unprecedented promotion, the Poor Knights attracted the best and the brightest young men of Europe to become Crusaders, to vow celibacy and leave their families in defense of Christ’s tomb against Muslim terrorists. The mission failed within nine years. Even so, Bernard’s propaganda caused the Templars to be received as conquering heroes when they returned to France. They set up their permanent lodge at Troyes under the patronage of the court of Champagne. (For nearly a century, Troyes had been Europe’s leading school for the study of the cabalah, which may explain why the city is laid out in the shape of a champagne cork.) For making the Templars a world power, Bernard shares credit with Cardinal Aimeric of Santa Maria Nuova. Aimeric was the Church’s highest judicial officer. It was his unlawful connivance that created Honorius II, the pope who ordained the Templars as the Church’s most highly-esteemed religious order. It was Aimeric, too, who devised a radical “inner renewal of the Church,” which inspired noblemen throughout England, Scotland, Flanders, Spain, and Portugal to shower the Templars with donations of land and money – over and above the properties required of all initiates upon joining the Order. When Honorius died in 1130, Aimeric led a minority of cardinals in another connivance resulting in the election of Innocent II, who was consecrated pope in Aimeric’s titular church of Santa Maria Nuova. In 1139, Innocent issued a bull placing the Templars under an exclusive vow of papal obedience – a measure by which Aimeric effectively put all Templar resources at the disposal of the papacy. Within another decade, the Knights were given exclusive rights by Pope Eugenius III to wear the rose croix, the rosy cross, on their white tunics. As their list of properties lengthened with donations from Italy, Austria, Germany, Hungary, and the Holy Land, the Templars built hundreds of great stone castles. Wealthy travelers lodged in these castles because of their unmatched security. Convinced they were building a new world, the Templars called each other frère maçon (“brother mason”). Later, this term would be anglicized into “Freemason.” The Templars invented modern banking by applying an oriental invention to their commerce. Agents of the Chinese emperor

Kao-tsung, inventor of paper currency called fei-chi’en, “flying money,” sought trade with the middle east during the period of Templar occupation. Kao-tsung’s was the first government on earth to enforce circulation of drafts as legal tender for debts. Evidently, Kao-tsung’s agents introduced the Knights to this new medium of exchange created out of merchant drafts. The Templars enhanced their already booming business of (1) accepting current accounts, deposit accounts, deposits of jewels, valuables and title deeds, (2) making loans and advances (charging “fees” because the Church forbade interest), and (3) acting as agents for the secure transmission of such things by (4) adding circulating letters of credit – flying money – to serve as paper currency. To supply the Templars’ currency needs may explain why paper in France was first manufactured in the Poor Knights’ hometown of Troyes. By 1300, presiding over the world economy from their Paris office, the Templars had become an international power unto themselves. Engaged in diplomacy at the highest levels of state from the Holy Land westward, they set the tastes, the goals, the morality, the rules of the civilized world. Kings did their bidding – when Henry III of England threatened to confiscate certain of the Order’s properties, he was upbraided by the Master Templar in the city of London: “What sayest thou, O King? So long as thou dost exercise justice, thou wilt reign. But if thou infringe it, thou wilt cease to be King.” But suddenly, at their very zenith, the Poor Knights suffered a strange reversal of fortunes. In 1302, King Philip IV of France dared to challenge their sovereignty on his own soil. He asserted that in France everyone, Knights Templars included, was subject to the King. Pope Boniface VIII jumped in and declared that France, the King, the Templars, all of them, and everybody else as well, belonged to Pontifex Maximus – “It is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff.” Philip then accused the pope of illegitimacy, sexual misconduct, and heresy. Boniface prepared a bull excommunicating Philip, but before it could be published, a band of the Philip’s mercenaries stormed the Vatican and demanded the pope’s resignation. Although the intruders were driven off, the shock to body and soul was too much for Boniface, and he died a month later. Two successor popes held firm against Philip, until Bertrand de Got, Archbishop of Bordeaux, was elected in 1305. Crowned in Lyons with the papal name Clement V, de Got moved the papacy to Avignon, and began a long train of concessions to Philip’s royal prerogative. Finally, on Friday, October 13, 1307, Philip arrested all but thirteen of the Templars in France, tried them and, upon evidence of their practice of the cabalah, found them guilty of blasphemy and magic. At least fifty knights were burned at the stake. From captured documents it was learned that the Templars, from the very beginning, had renounced what Roman theologians called “the religion of St. Peter.” They had been initiated into a

secret gnostic branch of the Eastern Church known as “the Primitive Christian Church.” Because the Primitive Christians’ apostolic succession claimed to flow from John the Baptist and the apostle John they were called “Johannites.” The Johannites believed that although Jesus was “imbued with a spirit wholly divine and endowed with the most astounding qualities,” he was not the true God. Consistent with gnostic logic, the true Johannite God would never lower Himself to become vile human matter. Jesus was in fact a false Messiah sent by the powers of darkness. He was justly crucified – although when his side was pierced he did repent of his pretensions and receive divine forgiveness. Thanks to his repentance, Jesus now enjoys everlasting life in the celestial company of the saints. Regarding miracles, the Johannites believed that Jesus “did or may have done extraordinary or miraculous things,” and that “since God can do things incomprehensible to human intelligence, all the acts of Christ as they are described in the Gospel, whether acts of human science or whether acts of divine power” can be accepted as true – except for the Resurrection, which is omitted from the Templars’ copy of the Gospel of St. John. Therefore, for all his wonderful attributes, Christ “was nothing, a false prophet and of no value.” Only the Higher God of Heaven had power to save mankind. But the Higher God avoided human matter, and so lordship over the material world belonged to Satanael, the evil brother of Jesus. Satanael alone could enrich mankind. Templar cabalah represented Satanael as the head of a goat emblazoned with, sometimes contained within, a pentagram. This symbol is deeply rooted in Old Testament cabalah, in which the goat is identified with power in the world and separation from God. On the greatest Israelite feastday, Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement, one goat was spared the sacrificial knife, and was sprinkled with the blood of another goat killed for the sins of Israel. The spared goat, the scapegoat, was then banished from the congregation to bear Israel’s sins into the wilderness, which typified the world. The scapegoat escaped with his life, his freedom. King Solomon conferred with evil spirits (I Kings 11:4), but Scripture describes the spirits only generally. However, the Zohar, or “Book of Splendor,” one of the main works of ancient cabalistic literature, tells us evil spirits appeared to the Israelites “under the form of he-goats and made known to them all that they wished to learn.” The Templars called this goat-idol “Baphomet,” from baphe- and -metis, Greek words combined to mean “absorption into wisdom.” Baphomet encapsulates the career of Solomon, who Scripture says was absorbed into the wisdom of God more than any other human being (I Kings 3:12) yet finished out his life in communion with he-goatish evil spirits (11:4). By the Templars’ Johannite standard, communing with the evil spirits was the secret to controlling the world. By the biblical standard, however, Solomon represents the impossibility of human perfectibility. Perfectibility is indeed attainable, according to Scripture, but only through the redemptive process shown in

the New Testament which Rome kept the Templars from reading. On March 22, 1312, Clement V dissolved the Knights Templar with his decree Vox clamantis (“War Cry”). But the dissolution proved a mere formality to further appease Philip. More importantly, it permitted the Templars, in other manifestations, to continue enriching the papacy. For Grand Master Jacques de Molay, just prior to his execution in 1313, sent the surviving thirteen French Templars to establish four new Metropolitan lodges: one at Stockholm for the north, one at Naples for the east, one at Paris for the south, and one at Edinburgh for the west. Thus, the Knights remained the militant arm of the papacy. Except that their wealth, their secrecy, their gnostic cabalism, and their oath of papal obedience were obscurely dispersed under a variety of corporate names. A subtle provision in Vox clamantis transferred most Templar estates to the Knights of St. John of Jerusalem, who took possession after King Philip’s death. In Germany and Austria, the Templars became “Rosicrucians” and “Teutonic Knights.” The Teutonic Knights grew strong in Mainz, birthplace of Gutenberg’s press. Six centuries later, as the “Teutonic Order,” the Knights would provide the nucleus of Adolf Hitler’s political support in Munich and Vienna. The Edinburgh lodge would become the headquarters of Scottish Rite Freemasonry, which Masonic historians call “American Freemasonry” because all but five of the signers of the Declaration of Independence are said to have practiced its craft. In Spain and Portugal the Templars became the “Illuminati” in whom Iñigo had taken membership at Manresa, and “Knights of Christ.” It was under the red pattée cross of the Knights of Christ that Columbus had taken possession of what he called “las Indias” for King Ferdinand V of Spain, grandfather of Iñigo’s discreet patron, Charles I and V, the Holy Roman Emperor. As early as August of 1523, as I hypothesized in the previous chapter, this vast yet fragmented subterranean empire – Roman Catholicism’s unseen root-system binding together the world – belonged to Iñigo de Loyola. His spiritual dynasty, which continues to this day, would use this system to cause God-fearing men who hated the papacy to perform, without realizing it, exactly how the papacy wanted them to. But what of Iñigo’s education? His rise in academe is the subject of the next chapter. Chapter 7. THE FINGERSTROKE OF GOD

Determined on a priestly life, Iñigo de Loyola returned to Barcelona from Jerusalem in the spring of 1524. He spent the next three years in Spain getting the requisite Latin. Since direct contact with the Bible was prohibited by law, his reading coursed the humanities. With the esoteric experience of his Spiritual Exercises, he charmed the wives of important men. He received frequent invitations to dine at elegant tables, but preferred to beg food door to door and distribute the choice pickings to the poor and sick. He lived in an attic and slept on the floorboards, trying desperately to persuade God of his worthiness. He prayed for six hours each day, attended mass three times a week, confessed every Sunday, and continued whipping himself. He devised secret penances, such as boring holes in his shoes and going barefoot in winter. Sometimes the Exercises aroused in his followers instances of bizarre conduct – swooning, long spells of fainting or melancholia, rolling about the ground, being gripped with corpse-like rigidity. The Spanish Inquisition investigated him on suspicion of preaching gnostic illuminism. When Iñigo insisted that he was not preaching at all, but was merely talking about the things of God in a familiar way, the Inquisitor released him. In successive frays, the Inquisition ordered Iñigo (1) to get rid of his eccentric clothing and dress like other students, (2) to refrain from holding meetings until he had completed four years of study, and (3) to refrain from defining what constituted a grave sin. Wearying of the harassment, he decided to seek his four years of education beyond the Inquisition’s reach. He set out for the University of Paris with a pack mule carrying his belongings. He arrived at the University on February 2, 1528, and soon afterward registered in the run-down old College of Montaigu. John Calvin, who would become Protestantism’s great theological systems designer, was leaving Montaigu just as Loyola arrived. Erasmus, the College’s most famous alumnus, remembered graduating from Montaigu “with nothing except an infected body and a vast array of lice.” The student body consisted mostly of wayward Parisian boys kept under harsh discipline; Iñigo was thirty-seven. Paris was expensive, even for students. Much of the funds Iñigo had raised in Barcelona had been stolen by one of his disciples. In early 1529 he went into Belgium, where it is believed he received money from people close to the Holy Roman Emperor. One of these was Juan de Cuellar, Treasurer of the Kingdom of Spain. Another was Luis Vives, personal secretary to the Emperor’s aunt, Queen Catherine of England, and private tutor to her daughter, Princess Mary (afterward the “Bloody” Queen). Iñigo returned to Paris much better off. He upgraded his lodgings. In October, he left Montaigu and enrolled at the College of Ste. Barbe across the street. He pursued a course in arts and philosophy that would last three and a half years. His name appears on the Ste. Barbe registry as “Ignatius de Loyola.” Some Jesuit historians

have guessed he adopted the name in veneration of Ignatius of Antioch, an early Christian martyr. It was at Ste. Barbe that Iñigo began earnestly organizing his army, but not before traveling again to Belgium to ask Juan de Cuellar and Luis Vives for yet more money. Armed with his command of the Templar secrets and with introductions provided by the Emperor and Vives, Ignatius crossed to England. This significant voyage is mentioned only once in his autobiography. He admits that he “returned with more alms than he usually did in other years.” Perhaps Queen Catherine, the Emperor’s aunt, introduced him to the Howards and the Petres, known to be among the first families to receive and nourish Jesuits sent to England. Starting with his two Ste. Barbe roommates, Ignatius soon gathered a circle of six close friends ranging in age from teens to early twenties. Somewhat like himself, they were adventurous, impressionable, intelligent, and unpersuaded of the Bible’s supreme authority. Their fondest dream was to save the Holy Land from the Muslims by performing heroic Templaresque exploits. One by one Ignatius gave them the Spiritual Exercises, and one by one they became disciples. Within a few years they were calling themselves La Compañìa de Iesus, the Company of Jesus. On August 15, 1534, Feast Day of the Assumption of the Virgin into heaven, the companions swore oaths of service to the Blessed Virgin in Ste. Marie’s Church at Montmartre, and to St. Denis, patron saint of France, in his chapel. (The experience of the Montmartre Oaths must have been intense, for Francis Xavier, who would become St. Francis, Apostle to the East, made the Spiritual Exercises with “a penitential fervor,” says Broderick in Origin of the Jesuits, “that nearly cost him the use of his limbs.”) They vowed poverty, chastity, and to rescue Jerusalem from the Muslims. However, should the rescue prove infeasible within a year, they vowed to undertake without question whatever other task the pope might require of them. Well before a year had passed, Clement VII died and the Jerusalem dream was overwhelmed by more present dangers. Luther’s Bible in German was creating defection in record numbers throughout Germany, Norway, Sweden, and Denmark. In France, the response to LeFevre’s Bible was so decisive that King Francis I exclaimed that he would behead his own children if he found them harboring the blasphemous heresies acquirable through direct contact with scripture. England was lost in its entirety, due not to Bible reading, which Henry VIII prosecuted as avidly as any pope, but to the royal love life. Henry had demanded that Clement VII grant him a divorce from the Emperor’s aunt Catherine, and then recognize the Protestant-oriented Anne Boleyn as his new Queen. When Clement stood mute, Henry took all of England away from Rome and made himself “complete owner of the lands and tenements [of England], as well at law as in equity.”

Clement VII was succeeded by the oldest cardinal, an erudite humanist with formidable diplomatic skills, 66-year-old Alessandro Farnese. Cardinal Farnese had been privately educated in the household of Lorenzo d’Medici and had been appointed Treasurer of the Vatican in 1492. He was crowned Pope Paul III. Vatican wags called Farnese “Cardinal Petticoat” because his strikingly beautiful sister Giulia [pictured in hardcover ROE] had been mistress to the licentious Pope Alexander VI, for which the same wags nicknamed her “Bride of Christ.” Giulia posed undraped for the statue of the Goddess Justice that still reclines voluptuously on Paul III’s tomb in St. Peter’s Basilica. Two centuries later, at the command, in the interests of decency, of Pius IX, the first pope to be officially declared infallible, Giulia’s exposed breasts were fitted with a metal blouse. Paul III is a major figure in the history of the Society of Jesus, and consequently of the United States of America, since it was he who approved, in the summer of 1539, Ignatius de Loyola’s business plan. Ignatius proposed a “minimal society” that would “do battle in the Lord God’s service under the banner of the Cross.” The militia would be very small, no more than sixty members, and each would have to take four vows – of poverty, chastity, obedience to the Church, and a vow of special obedience to the pope. They would not be confined to any specific parish but would be dispersed throughout the world according to the papacy’s needs. They would wear no particular habit, but would dress according to the environment in which they found themselves. They would infiltrate the world in an unpredictable variety of pursuits – as doctors, lawyers, authors, reforming theologians, financiers, statesmen, courtiers, diplomats, explorers, tradesmen, merchants, poets, scholars, scientists, architects, engineers, artists, printers, philosophers, and whatever else the world might demand and the Church require. Their head would be a Superior General. In the Constitutions which Ignatius was writing, the Superior General would be “obeyed and reverenced at all times as the one who holds the place of Christ our Lord.” The phrase “holds the place of Christ” means that the Superior General would share with the Pope, at a level unperceived by the general public, the divine title of “Vicar of Christ” first claimed by Gelasius I on May 13, 495. Loyola’s completed Constitutions would repeat five hundred times that one is to see Christ in the person of the Superior General. The General’s equal status with the Pope, advantaged by an obscurity that renders him virtually invisible, is why the commander-in-chief of the Society of Jesus has always been called Papa Nero, the Black Pope. The Superior General’s small army would be trained by the Spiritual Exercises to practice a brand of obedience Loyola termed contemplativus in actione, active contemplation, instantaneous obedience with all critical thought suppressed. As stated in Section 353.1 of the Exercises, “We must put aside all judgment of our own, and keep the mind ever ready and prompt to obey in all things the hierarchical Church.” But Jesuit obedience would be

more than mere obedience of the will. An obedient will suppresses what it would do in order to obey what a superior wants done. Ignatius demanded obedience of the understanding. An obedient understanding alters its perception of reality according to the superior’s dictates. Section 365.13 declares, “We must hold fast to the following principle: What seems to me white, I will believe black if the hierarchical Church so defines.” Francis Xavier would later describe this quality of submission in a vow that unintentionally summarized the Jesuit mission: “I would not even believe in the Gospels were the Holy Church to forbid it.” The Society does not open its extreme oath of obedience to public inspection. However, a script alleged to be a true facsimile was translated by Edwin A. Sherman and deposited in the Library of Congress with the number bx3705.s56. According to this document, when a Jesuit of the minor rank is to be elevated to command, he is conducted into the Chapel of the Convent of the Order, where there are only three others present, the principal or Superior standing in front of the altar. On either side stands a monk, one of whom holds a banner of yellow and white, which are the Papal colors, and the other a black banner with a dagger and red cross above a skull and crossbones, with the initials ‘I.N.R.I.,’ and below them the words ‘ICSTUM NACAR REGES IMPIOS,’ the meaning of which is ‘It is just to annihilate impious rulers.’ [Biblically, these initials represent the Roman inscription above Christ’s head on the cross: ‘Jesus of Nazareth King of the Jews.’] On the floor is a red cross upon which the postulant or candidate kneels. The Superior hands him a small black crucifix, which he takes in his left hand and presses to his heart and the Superior at the same time presents to him a dagger, which he grasps by the blade and holds the point against his heart, the Superior still holding it by the hilt…. The Superior gives a preamble, and then administers the oath: I, ______________, now, in the presence of Almighty God, the Blessed Virgin Mary, the blessed Michael the Archangel, the blessed St. Paul and all the Saints and sacred Hosts of Heaven, and to you, my Ghostly Father, the Superior General of the Society of Jesus, founded by Ignatius Loyola, in the Pontificate of Paul the Third, and continued to the present, do by the Womb of the Virgin, the Matrix of God, and the Rod of Jesus Christ, declare and swear, that His Holiness the Pope is Christ’s Vice-Regent and is the true and only Head of the Catholic and Universal Church throughout the earth; and that by virtue of the keys of binding and loosing, given to His Holiness by my Saviour, Jesus Christ, he hath power to depose heretical kings, princes, states, commonwealths and governments, all being illegal without his sacred confirmation, and that they may safely be destroyed. Therefore, to the utmost of my power, I shall and will defend this doctrine and His Holiness’ right and custom against all usurpers of the heretical or Protestant authority whatever, especially the Lutheran Church of Germany, Holland, Denmark,

Sweden and Norway, and the now pretended authority and churches of England and Scotland, and branches of the same now established in Ireland and on the Continent of America and elsewhere; and all adherents in regard that they be usurped and heretical, opposing the sacred Mother Church of Rome. I do now renounce and disown any allegiance as due to any heretical king, prince, or state named Protestants or Liberals, or obedience to any of their laws, magistrates or officers. I do further declare that the doctrines of the churches of England and Scotland, of the Calvinists, Huguenots and others of the name Protestants or Liberals to be damnable, and they themselves damned and to be damned who will not forsake the same. I do further declare that I will help, assist and advise all or any of His Holiness’ agents in any place wherever I shall be, in Switzerland, German, Holland, Denmark, Sweden, Norway, England, Ireland, or America, or in any other kingdom or territory I shall come to, and do my uttermost to extirpate the heretical Protestants or Liberals’ doctrines and to destroy all their pretended powers, regal or otherwise. I do further promise and declare that, notwithstanding I am dispensed with, to assume any religion heretical, for the propagating of the Mother Church’s interest, to keep secret and private all her agents’ counsels from time to time, as they may entrust me, and not to divulge, directly or indirectly, by word, writing, or circumstance whatever; but to execute all that shall be proposed, given in charge or discovered unto me, by you, my Ghostly Father, or any of this sacred convent. I do further promise and declare that I will have no opinion or will of my own, or any mental reservation whatever, even as a corpse or cadaver, but will unhesitatingly obey each and every command that I may receive from my superiors in the Militia of the Pope and of Jesus Christ. That I will go to any part of the world whithersoever I may be sent, to the frozen regions of the North, the burning sands of the desert of Africa, or the jungles of India, to the centres of civilization of Europe, or to the wild haunts of the barbarous savages of America, without murmuring or repining, and will be submissive in all things whatsoever communicated to me. I furthermore promise and declare that I will, when opportunity presents, make and wage relentless war, secretly or openly, against all heretics, Protestants and Liberals, as I am directed to do, to extirpate and exterminate them from the face of the whole earth; and that I will spare neither age, sex, or condition; and that I will hang, burn, waste, boil, flay, strangle and bury alive these infamous heretics, rip up the stomachs and wombs of their women and crush their infants’ heads against the walls, in order to annihilate forever their execrable race. That when the same cannot be done openly, I will secretly use the poisoned cup, the strangulating cord, the steel of the poinard or the leaden bullet, regardless of the honor, rank, dignity, or authority of the person or persons, whatever may be their condition in life, either

public or private, as I at any time may be directed so to do by any agent of the Pope or Superior of the Brotherhood of the Holy Faith, of the Society of Jesus. In confirmation of which, I hereby dedicate my life, my soul, and all my corporeal powers, and with this dagger which I now receive, I will subscribe my name written in my own blood, in testimony thereof; and should I prove false or weaken in my determination, may my brethren and fellow soldiers of the Militia of the Pope cut off my hands and my feet, and my throat from ear to ear, my belly opened and sulphur burned therein, with all the punishment that can be inflicted upon me on earth and my soul be tortured by demons in an eternal hell forever! All of which I, ____________________, do swear by the blessed Trinity and blessed Sacrament, which I am now to receive, to perform and on my part to keep inviolably; and do call all the heavenly and glorious host of heaven to witness these my real intentions to keep this my oath. In testimony hereof I take this most holy and blessed Sacrament of the Eucharist, and witness the same further, with my name written with the point of this dagger dipped in my own blood and sealed in the face of this holy Convent. He receives the wafer from the Superior and writes his name with the point of his dagger dipped in his own blood taken from over the heart…. When Ignatius concluded his presentation, the Pope reportedly cried out “Hoc est digitus Dei!” – “This is the fingerstroke of God!” On September 27, 1540, Paul III sealed his approval with the highest and most solemn form of papal pronouncement, a document known as a “bull” (from the Latin bulla, meaning “bubble,” denoting the attached ovoid or circular seal bearing the pope’s name). Paul’s bull ordaining the Jesuits is entitled Regimini militantis ecclesiae, “On the Supremacy of the Church Militant.” The title forms a cabalistic device common to pagan Roman divining. Known as notariqon, this device is an acronym that enhances the meaning of its initialized words, in the way “MADD” tells us that Mothers Against Drunk Drivers are more than “against” drunken drivers, they’re very angry. “Regimini militantis ecclesiae” produces the notariqon “R[O]ME,” the empire whose salvation the Society of Jesus was ordained by this bull to secure through the arts of war. The following April, the original six and a few other members elected Ignatius de Loyola their first Superior General. What had been approved as a minimal society soon multiplied to a thousand strong. Ignatius did this by administering to only sixty the extreme oath of obedience to the pope, while admitting hundreds more under lesser oaths. Ever since, the exact size of the Society has been known only to the Superior General. As the world gained increasing numbers of doctors, lawyers, authors, reforming theologians, financiers, statesmen, courtiers, diplomats, explorers, tradesmen, merchants, poets, scholars, scientists, architects, engineers, artists, printers, and philosophers, it was extremely difficult for an ordinary citizen to tell which were Jesuits and which were not. Not

even Jesuits could say for sure, because of a provision in the Constitutions (Sections 81–86 of Part I) which authorizes the Superior General to “receive agents, both priestly agents to help in spiritual matters and lay agents to give aid in temporal and domestic functions.” Called “coadjutors,” these lay agents could be of any religious denomination, race, nationality, or sex. They took an oath which bound them “for whatever time the Superior General of the Society should see fit to employ them in spiritual or temporal services.” This provision was availed by so many black popes that the French had a name for people suspected of being Jesuit agents: les robes-petites (“short-robes”). The English called them “short-coats” or “Ignatians.” Within two years of Regimini militantis ecclesiae, Paul III appointed the Society to administer the Roman Inquisition (not to be confused with the Spanish Inquisition, which reported only to the Spanish crown). When the Jesuits were comfortable with the Inquisition, Paul made his move to “reconcile” with the Protestants. . as we shall see in the next chapter Chapter 8 MOVING IN The term “Protestant” was coined in 1529 to describe the large number of princes and delegates of fourteen cities, largely German, who protested Emperor Charles Habsburg’s attempt to enforce the Edict of Worms. This edict bound the Empire’s three hundred princely states and free cities to Roman Catholicism. The Protestants proposed a compromise formula – basically a statement of the Lutheran faith – known as the Augsburg Confession. For fifteen years the Edict of Worms and the Augsburg Confession kept Catholic and Protestant rulers in a Mexican standoff. Then, on December 13, 1545, Paul III called both factions to the small German-speaking northern Italian cathedral city of Trent. The promise was to resolve differences peacefully in an ecumenical council. The Council of Trent had not been seated four months before it decreed that the books and biblical translations of Luther, LeFevre, Zwingli, Calvin, and other “unapproved persons” were “altogether forbidden [and] allowed to no one, since little advantage, but much danger, generally arises from reading them.” Then the Jesuits moved in. Diego Lainez, Alfonso Salmeron, two of the original companions, and Claude LeJay, all three in their early thirties, distinguished themselves at Trent early on by spurning the grand style of the other delegates. They set up housekeeping

in a “narrow, smoke-blackened baker’s oven” and wore clothing so heavily patched and greasy that other priests were embarrassed to associate with them. They carried with them intricate advisories from Ignatius himself, written from the delegates’ point of view, as for example: When the matter that is being debated seems so manifestly just and right that I can no longer keep silent, then I should speak my mind with the greatest composure and conclude what I have said with the words ‘subject of course to the judgment of a wiser head than mine.’ If the leaders of the opposing party should try to befriend me, I must cultivate these men, who have influence over the heretics and lukewarm Catholics, and try to win them away from their errors with holy wisdom and love…. Most of the eighteen-year lifetime of the Council of Trent consisted of two intermissions spanning four and ten years each. At the beginning of the second intermission, Ignatius founded a special college in Rome for German-speaking Jesuits called the Germanicum. Three years later, the Peace of Augsburg established the principle cuius regio, eius religio, “whose the region, his the religion.” The Peace of Augsburg was Jesuit paydirt. They could now bring whole populations to Rome simply by winning over a few princes. And so they did. By 1560, the Society had returned virtually all of South Germany and Austria to the Church. The fruits of the Germanicum were so successful that when the Council of Trent finally adjourned on December 4, 1563, its decrees and canons conceded nothing to the Protestant reformers. Indeed, under the spiritual direction of Superior General Diego Lainez – Ignatius had died in 1556 – the Council denied every Protestant doctrine point by point. Anathematized (eternally damned) was anyone who believed that salvation is God’s free gift to His faithful and does not depend upon partaking of Church sacraments. Anathematized was anyone who looked to the Bible for the ultimate authority on “doctrine, reproof, correction, and instruction in righteousness” rather than to the teaching Church. Anathematized was anyone who regarded as unworthy of belief such unscriptural doctrines as (1) the efficacy of papal indulgences, (2) of confession alone to a priest as necessary to salvation, (3) of the mass as a true and real sacrifice of the body of Christ necessary to salvation, (4) the legitimacy of teachings on purgatory, (5) the celibate priesthood, (6) invoking saints by prayer to intercede with God, (7) the veneration of relics, and (8) the use of images and symbols. The Council of Trent hurled one hundred twenty-five anathemas – eternal damnations – against Protestantism. Then, as an addendum to its closing statements, the Council recommended that the Jesuits “should be given pride of place over members of other orders as preachers and professors.” It was at Trent that the Roman Catholic Church began marching to the beat of the Black Papacy. A generation later, the guidelines of the Roman Inquisition

under Jesuit direction were published at the command of the Cardinals Inquisitors General. This Directorium Inquisitorum (1584) was dedicated to Gregory XIII, the pope who bestowed upon Jesuits the right to deal in commerce and banking, and who also decreed that every papal legate should have a Jesuit advisor on his personal staff. Here follows a summary of the Directorium Inquisitorum (translated by J. P. Callender, 1838): He is a heretic who does not believe what the Roman Hierarchy teaches…. A heretic merits the pains of fire…. By the Gospel, the canons, civil law, and custom, heretics must be burned…. For the suspicion alone of heresy, purgation is demanded…. Magistrates who refuse to take the oath for defense of the faith shall be suspected of heresy…. Wars may be commenced by the authority of the Church…. Indulgences for the remission of all sin belong to those who signed with the cross for the persecution of heretics…. Every individual may kill a heretic. Persons who betray heretics shall be rewarded…. Heretics may be forced to profess the Roman faith…. A heretic, as he sins in all places, may everywhere be judged…. Heretics must be sought after, and be corrected or exterminated…. Heretics enjoy no privileges in law or equity…. The goods of heretics are to be considered as confiscated from the perpetration of the crime… The pope can enact new articles of faith…. Definitions of popes and councils are to be received as infallible…. Inquisitors may torture witnesses to obtain the truth…. It is laudable to torture those of every class who are guilty of heresy…. The Pope has power over infidels…. The Church may make war with infidels…. Those who are strongly suspected are to be reputed as heretics…. He who does not inform against heretics shall be deemed as suspected…. Inquisitors may allow heretics to witness against heretics, but not for them…. Inquisitors must not publish the names of informers, witnesses, and accusers…. Penitent heretics may be condemned to perpetual imprisonment…. Inquisitors may provide for their own expenditures, and the salaries of their officers, from the property of heretics…. Inquisitors enjoy the benefits of a plenary indulgence [a full papal forgiveness of sin] at all times in life, and in death. The Inquisition’s effect, of course, was to send the more resourceful of the “heretics, Protestants and Liberals” who escaped torture or execution scurrying underground, or into the burgeoning world of commerce, or into regions where Protestant civil authorities kept Inquisitors at bay. Yearning for a less intrusive religious experience, they joined attractive philosophical fraternities where they could speak freely against Roman Catholicism. For this ostensible reason, these fraternities or cults or lodges operated in secrecy. In fact, they were the remnants of the Templar network – Rosicrucians, Teutonic Knights, the numerous and various rites of Freemasonry. Like the Templars and the Jesuits, they were religious hierarchies of strict obedience. They differed from the Jesuits, however, in that their pyramid culminated in an ultimate authority no brother could identify with certainty. The highest master of a Lodge received commandments from an “Unknown Superior,” a Superior whose will the master’s whole struggle up the degrees had trained him to obey without question. What the masters never

realized was that this mysterious personage, as we shall examine in more detail later, was in fact none other than the Black Pope. A century after Trent, a descendant of Paul III, Ranuccio Farnese, commissioned the great Venetian painter Sebastiano Ricci to commemorate the genesis of this definitive Council. Sebastiano produced his famous “Paul III and the cardinals en route to Trent.” The work is breathtakingly candid.In the air, above the pope’s head, hovers a deity, directing the entourage onward. The deity is not Jesus or Mary or Yahweh, God of the Bible. It is Mercury of the Sibylline and Virgilian gospels – the holy scripture of Caesarean Rome. Mercury is the celebrated god of commerce. The metal most essential to commercial fluidity is named for him. Metallic mercury is known to scientists as the element Hg (derived from the Latin hydrargyrum, “liquid silver”). It is Hg’s unique chemical nature that produces refined gold, the fundamental substance in which commercial value is denominated. Liquid at room temperature, Hg draws impurities out of gold ore and binds them into an amalgam. When the amalgam is heated, the heat drives away both Hg and the impurities. What is left is pure gold suitable for further amalgamation into coin. Mercury’s theological life began in ancient Babylon, where he was known as Marduk. The Bible calls him Merodach, the Hebrews called him Enoch, the Egyptians called him Thoth, the Scandinavians worshiped him as Odin, the Teutons as Wotan, and the Orientals as Buddha. Livy says he was introduced to the Romans in 495 bc as a Latinate version of the Greek god Hermes. By whatever name, in whatever culture, Mercury is considered the god of the Universal Mind, of Writing, Number, and Thought. Just as Mercury the metal draws out impurities and binds them into a mass that is burned and discarded, Mercury the deity uses his intellectual brilliance to play Pied Piper to impure humanity. He attracts followers and leads their souls to Hades, for which the Greeks gave him the title Psychopompas (from psycho- “soul” and pompous, “director”). Because Hades is not the most desirable of destinations, the Psychopomp had to construct elegant missionary adaptations. He had to charm souls, deceive them into following him any way he could – whether by words, sights, or sounds. Like Hg, his metallic form, Mercury could change his shape instantaneously. Did you see the villain in the movie Terminator II? With his ever-changing voices, physiognomies, and identities, he is state-of-the-art Psychopomp. In many cultures, Mercury’s ingenious deceptions earned him the title of “The Trickster.” He was patron deity of deceivers. And of thieves – even as a baby, Mercury couldn’t resist stealing Apollo’s cattle…. Was Sebastiano Ricci telling us that Mercury was the dominating spirit of the Council of Trent? Certainly the Council required,

and still requires, Roman Catholics to honor many traditions which the Bible either condemns or does not authorize. Yet the Council also required, and still requires, that the Bible be honored as divinely inspired. Honoring the Bible by advocating unbiblical norms? This calls for a skill worthy of the Psychopomp, a skill that makes one believe that black is white. As we’ve seen, this is the Jesuit skill – securing obedience of the subject’s understanding. If indeed the Society of Jesus performs the function of Mercury, it is participating in a natural process known to pagan and biblical scriptures alike, a process by which impure humanity is attracted to oblivion, leaving behind only the pure. The theological implications of this process we shall discuss toward the end of this book. With the Inquisition and the Council of Trent to pave their way, the Society of Jesus quickly became what Loyola had dreamed it would become: the resurrected Knights Templar. In the next chapter, we shall examine the continuation of their meteoric rise as developers of the modern world. FULL CONTENTS Introduction: ix Preface ix Foreword xi Orientation xiii 1: Subliminal Rome 1 2: Marginalizing the Bible 9 3: Missionary Adaptation 15 4: Medici Learning 19 5: Appointment at Cyprus 27 6: The Epitome of Christian Values 35 7: The Fingerstroke of God 43 8: Moving In 55 9: Securing Confidence 63 10: Definitions 77 11: The Thirteen Articles Concerning Military Art 85 12: Lorenzo Ricci’s War 97 13: The Secret Bridge 117 14: The Dogma of Independence 129 15: The Madness of King George III 135 16: Tweaking the Religious Right 147 17: A Timely Grand Tour 155 18: The Stimulating Effects of Tea 167 19: Death and Resurrection of Lorenzo Ricci 187 20: American Grafitti 203 21: Jupiter’s Earthly Abode 227 22: The Immaculate Conception 235 23: The Dome of the Great Sky 247 24: The Mark of Cain 265 25: The Two Ministries 279 Appendix 293 a: Fifty Centuries of the Annu Signature 293 b: Superior Generals of the Society of Jesus 296 c: Glossary 298 d: Notes 303 e: Bibliography 313

f: Index 318 ILLUSTRATIONS 1 Time Magazine Cover* 6 Fasces* 8 The Washington Nunciature* 11 Emperor Constantine* 12 Mithras & David 14 Pope Gregory IX Excommunicating the Holy Roman Emperor* 18 Pope Clement VII & the Holy Roman Emperor* 21 Martin Luther* 26 Ignatius de Loyola* 34 The Baphomet* 36 Map of Troyes* 42 Fingerstroke of God* 46 Giulia Farnese* 54 The Spirit of Trent (after Sebastiano Ricci)* 62 Ignatius in Heaven 96 Lorenzo Ricci 114 Castel Sant’Angelo*124 Charles Thomson* 128 Cardinal Robert Bellarmine* 134 John Stuart, Lord Bute* 146 Bishop John Carroll* 154 Archbishop von Hontheim* 166 King George III* 186 East India Company Flag 202 American Graffiti 204 The Mosaic Seal 226 L’Enfant’s Plan of Washington* 228 Congressional Medal of Honor 232 Seal of Georgetown University‡ 234 Persephone, Goddess of the Capitol‡ 246 “Apotheosis of Washington”§ 248 Constantino Brumidi* 252 Rev. Charles Chiniquy* 257 The States§ / The Virgin pursues evildoers§ 258 Young America§ 259 Jehu worshiping Shalmaneser II 261 Mercury & Morris§ 293–5 The Annu Signature*, , ‡ 116 Washington in Masonic Regalia* * sketch by the author author’s collection ‡ photographed by the author § Architect of the Capitol BIBLIOGRAPHY Ahlstrom, Sydney E., A Religious History of the American People, New Haven & London: Yale University Press (1972) Aveling, J.C.Hugh, The Jesuits, New York: Stein & Day (1981) Barthel, Dr. Manfred, transl. by Mark Howson, The Jesuits: History and Legend of the Society of Jesus, New York: Quill, William Morrow (1982–84)

Baigent, Michael, Richard Leigh and Henry Lincoln, Holy Blood, Holy Grail, New York: Delacorte Press (1982) Black’s Law Dictionary, 5th edition Bristowe, Mrs. Sidney, Sargon the Magnificent, Canada: Burnaby, B.C., Association of the Covenant People (undated, but estimated c. 1925) Bullock, Steven C., Revolutionary Brotherhood: Freemasonry and the Transformation of the American Social Order, 1730–1840, Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press (1996) Caraman, Philip, SJ, Ignatius Loyola: A Biography of the Founder of the Jesuits, San Francisco: Harper & Row (1990) Carroll, John (edited by Thomas O’Brien Hanley), The John Carroll Papers, 1755–1791, in 3 volumes, University of Notre Dame Press (1976) Catholic Almanac Chadwick, The Early Church, Eerdmans (1967) Chiniquy, Rev. Charles, My Fifty Years in the Church of Rome: The Conversion of a Priest, orig. pub. London, 1886, by Protestant Literature Depository. Abridged version published 1985 by Chick Publications, Chino CA Cottrell, John, Anatomy of an Assassination, New York: Funk & Wagnalls (1966) Daraul, Arkon, A History of Secret Societies, Citadel Press (1995) Del Mar, Alexander, Middle Ages Revisited, California 90250: Hawthorne, Omni Book Club (orig. pub. 1899); The Worship of Augustus Caesar, Hawthorne, CA: Christian Book Club of America (1976) De Rosa, Peter, Vicars of Christ: The Dark Side of the Papacy, New York: Crown Publishers (1988) Dictionary of Symbols, Malmo, Sweden: Merkur International KB Dillenberger, John, ed., Martin Luther: Selection from his writings, New York: Doubleday Anchor Press (1961) Dome of the United States Capitol, The: An Architectural History, U.S. Government Printing Office (1992) “Education Reporter,” published monthly by Eagle Forum Education & Legal Defense Fund, St. Louis, MO 63105 Fabre Palaprat, J.B, Recherches historiques sur les Templiers, (1835) Finke & Stark, The Churching of America, New Jersey: Rutgers University Press (1993) Foley, Henry, SJ, Records of the English Province SJ, London (1877–1883) Geisler & MacKenzie, Roman Catholics and Evangelicals: Agreements and Differences, Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, (1995) Gwynn, Denis, Bishop Challoner, London:Douglas Organ (1946) Hall, H.R., The Ancient History of the Near East, London: Mithuen & Co. (11th Edition, 1950) Hall, Manly P., The Secret Teachings of All Ages: an Encyclopedic Outline of Masonic, Hermetic, Qabbalistic & Rosicrucian Symbolical Philosophy, Philosophical Research Society, (1988) Harris, Brig. Gen. Thomas, Rome’s Responsibility for the Assassination of Abraham Lincoln, orig. pub. 1897, repub. by Petersburg OH 44454: Pilgrim Brethren Press (1989) Hayden, Sidney, Washington and His Masonic Compeers, New York: Masonic Publishing and Manufacturing Company (1868) Hendricks, J. Edwin, Charles Thomson and the Making of A New Nation 1729–1824, Fairleigh Dickinson University Press (1979) Herbert of Cherbury, Edward, Lord, The Life and Raigne of King Henry the Eighth, London: Printed by E. G. for Thomas Whitaker (1649) Hislop, Alexander, Two Babylons, Neptune, New Jersey: Loiseaux Brothers (1916) Holt, SJ, Geoffrey, St. Omer’s and Bruges Colleges, 1593–1773: A Biographical

Dictionary, London (1979) Hooke, Samuel H., Babylonian and Assyrian Religion, Norman OK: University of Oklahoma Press (1963) Huber, J., Les Jesuites, Paris: Sandoz et Fischbacher (1875) Hunt, Dave, Editor, “The Berean Call,” P.O. Box 7019, Bend, Oregon 97708 Hyneman and Lutz, editors, American Political Writing During the Founding Era 1760–1805, Indianapolis: Liberty Press (1983), two volumes Kaster, Joseph, Putnam’s Concise Mythological Dictionary, The Putnam Publishing Group (1963) Kelly, J.N.D.,The Oxford Dictionary of Popes, Oxford & New York:Oxford University Press (1986, 1989) King, Leonard W., A History of Babylon, London: Chatto and Windus (1919) Koch and Peden, The Selected Writings of John & John Quincy Adams, New York: Alfred A. Knopf (1946) Letson & Wiggins, The Jesuit Mystique, Chicago: The Loyola Press (1995) Martin, Malachi, SJ, The Jesuits: The Society of Jesus and the Betrayal of the Roman Catholic Church, New York: Simon & Schuster (1987) Meissner, W.W., SJ, MD, Ignatius of Loyola: The Psychology of A Saint, New Haven, London: Yale University Press (1992) Michelet, M., Life of Luther, written by himself, London: David Bogue (1846). Luther’s texts collected, arranged, and translated by Michelet Miller, John G., Origins of the American Revolution, New York: Little, Brown (1943) Muzzey, David S., Our Country’s History, Boston: Ginn &Company (1961) Needham, Guil. (Imprimatur), A Brief Historical Account of the Behaviour of the Jesuites and their Faction, for the First twenty five Years of Q. Elizabeth’s Reign, with an Epistle of W. Watson, a Secular Priest, shewing, How they were thought of by the other Romanists of that Time, London: James Adamson (1689) New Catholic Encycyclopedia (1967) O’Gorman, Thomas, History of the Roman Catholic Church in the United States, New York (1895) Paris, Edmond, The Secret History of the Jesuits (translated 1975, original publisher and publication date unknown), distributed by Chino CA: Chick Publications Piquet, Des Banqiers au Moyen Age: les Templiers, Paris, (1931) Pike, Albert Commander, Morals and Dogma of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry, Richmond, Virginia: Jenkins, Inc. (1871, 1923) Puhl, Louis J., The Spiritual Exercises of St. Ignatius, Westminster, MD: The Newman Press (1959) Ragon, J.M., Cours Philosophique et Interpretatif des Initiations anciennes et modernes, edition sacree a l’usage des Loges et des Macons Seulement (Masonic year 5,842) Ragozin, Zenaide A., Chaldea from the Earliest Times to the Rise of Assyria, London: T. Fisher Unwin (1886) Rush, Benjamin (Ed. by George W. Corner), The Autobiography of Benjamin Rush, Princeton University Press, (1948) Sayce, Archibald, The Hibbert Lectures on the Origin and Growth of Religion, as Illustrated by the Religion of the Ancient Babylonians, London: Williams & Norgate, (1909) Scharf, History of Western Maryland, Baltimore (1882) Sedgwick, Jr., Theodore, A Memoir of the Life of William Livingston, New York (1844) Shroeder, H.J., trans., The Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent, Rockford IL: TAN Books (1978) Smiles, Samuel, The Huguenots, New York: Harper & Brothers (1869) Smith, George, The Chaldean Account of Genesis, New York: Scribner, Armstrong & Co. (1876)

Stiles, Ezra, The Literary Diary of Ezra Stiles, New York (1901) Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance with Hebrew & Greek Lexicons Syme, Ronald, The Roman Revolution, Oxford University Press (1966) U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, Case No. 85–1309 We, the People: The Story of the United States Capitol: Its Past and Its Promise, U.S. Capitol Historical Society Viorst, Milton, ed., The Great Documents of Western Civilization, New York; Barnes and Noble, 1965 Walsh, James J., MD, American Jesuits, New York: The Macmillan Company (1934) White, James R., The Roman Catholic Controversy, Minneapolis: Bethany House Publications (1996) Williams, H. S., Editor, The Historians’ History of the World, A Comprehensive Narrative of the Rise and Development of Nations As Recorded by the Great, London: The Times (1908) Wills, Garry, Witches & Jesuits: Shakespeare’s Macbeth, New York: Oxford University Press (1995) ============================================================ The Papal Presidency by Jon Rappoport Part One. Talion.com has been exploring the background of ES&S, which is reputed to be the largest election-management company in the world. Hardware and software services, voting machines, 40,000 elections run in 30 years, globally. Counted 100,000,000 votes in the 2000 US election. So now Talion has received a letter from the attorneys for ES&S. The letter wants a retraction by Talion for, apparently, alleging a conspiracy in vote counts. Talion denies its material alleges a conspiracy. sf.indymedia.org is also running a relevant article, and giving links re ES&S. One more than interesting thing I glean from all this material. It is stated that one of the owners of ES&S (there appear to be a number of owners) is Charter Oaks Partners. Charter Oaks is cited as an affiliate of Rothschild Realty, Inc. And this latter outfit is cited as an affiliate of Rothschild, Inc. Jump shift: Tupper Saussy's tremendous book, Rulers of Evil (HarperCollins). Saussy writes, "I looked them [House of Rothschild] up in Encyclopedia Judaica and discovered that they bear the title 'guardian of the Vatican Treasury'...Who would ever search a family of orthodox Jews for the key to the wealth of the Roman Catholic Church?" Saussy then makes a possible further connection between Rothschild and "Rome"---in the outlands of unexplored history: Ancient Roman soldiers carried red shields. In German, Rothschild means "red shield." At one point, the Rothschild firm adopted the name, Meyer Amschel Rothschild and Sohne. The acronym for that is MARS. The red planet. The planet of war. One might say the symbolism here is a stretch. But to say it's all a coincidence is also quite a

stretch. And certainly we KNOW (ha ha) that the Vatican is just a foundering, floundering organization riddled by pedophile scandals, much too weak to carry out any serious OPS involving covert control. Sure. Sure. I'm just as sure that John Swomley's blockbuster article in The Humanist (May/June 1998) was just an errant missile fired way off target. Yeah. Here are the opening lines: "A massive political campaign is underway in an effort to achieve religious and political control of crucial American policies and institutions...It was inspired by the Vatican and has been carried out over a period of years under the supervision of the National Council of Bishops." Swomley points out that, within a month of Bush the Elder taking office as US president, he met with all five US cardinals at the White House. Two cardinals, Bernard Law and John O'Conner, did overnights at the White House. Doug Wead, a special assistant to Bush the Elder, stated, "[Bush] has been more sensitive and accessible to the needs of the Catholic Church than any president I know of in American history...this administration has appointed more Catholic cabinet officers than any other in American history." Author Swomley continues: "The bishops outlined their political campaign in 1975...in a pastoral letter for Catholic officials and organizations. It is an ambitious campaign aimed at controlling political appointments, Congress, and other national and state political offices." Swomley cites the book, Catholic Bishops in American Politics, by Catholic writer Timothy A Byrnes. Byrnes called this political plan the "most focused and aggressive political leadership" ever mounted by the Church biggies. The American bishops listed 20 Catholic organizations and spelled out how each group could contribute to the effort to control major American political institutions. The effort, according to the bishops, involved getting "the [Catholic] National organizations to inventory their internal political capabilities systematically by means of their own government relations [connections]...[and to set up]a communications structure from Washington to the national office of each [Catholic] organization to activate support for the political program." Swomley makes it clear that the Church Plan for control was not only directed at the judiciary on all levels, but at executive and legislative branches as well. This meant pro-active Church organizations working in EVERY CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT IN THE US, AND AT STATE GOVERNMENT LEVELS AS WELL. Swomley sums up: "In other words, the bishops have established an organization in each parish, diocese, state, and on other levels in an effort to take control of American politics..." The springboard for all this organizing and action is the abortion issue---but that is only a first step in fanning out power over other issues. And over other people. Again, Swomley: "Another aspect of the bishops' plan is their ecumenical effort to organize Protestant evangelists and churches as 'front' groups, so as to avoid anti-catholic criticism or recognition that there is a Catholic campaign to control politics. (E.g., front groups such as Southern Baptist Convention, Mormons, Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, and "lay leaders" such as then-Senator JOHN ASHCROFT) The author of this article in The Humanist, John Swomley, is professor emeritus of social ethics at St. Paul School of Theology in Kansas City, Missouri. In case you're wondering whether any Catholic groups involved in this political-control OP have

been investigated by the feds for violating their 501C3 status, which forbids them from engaging in political work, the answer, so far as I can tell, is no. So now go back and re-read this piece and fill in some of the connections. Note: I am writing about the pernicious effects of religious ORGANIZATIONS. This has nothing to do with a person's private faith. Part Two. A group called Catholics for a Free Choice has issued a report, Beyond the Spin. Here is a quote: "Cultivating the Catholic vote has become the cornerstone of President Bush's political strategy for both this year's Senate and House races and for his own re-election effort in 2004." It is possible that, by not reporting the results of its exit polls last week, Voter News Service obscured estimates on how many Catholics voted for Bush-supported candidates. Makes one wonder. An excellent article by Ryan Lizza in TNR Online details some of the Bush-camp work in obtaining the Catholic vote. "Bush has courted the Catholic vote more doggedly than any modern president..." "The president makes a point of meeting with local bishops wherever he travels..." "[Bush]has made Catholic leaders fixtures at White House events, and his political staff holds a weekly conference call with conservative Catholics." "What was new last year [2000] was the success Bush had in attracting a long-cherished Reublican target: religiously active Catholics. Michael Barone, co-author of The Almanac of American Politics, calls this success 'one of the untold stories of the [2000] campaign.'" "Working through a 'Catholic Task Force' at the [2000] Repiblican National Convention, the Bush campaign compiled a list of almost three million active Catholics in 14 states. Over the course of the [ensuing] campaign, each household on the list received at least two phone calls and twi pieces of mail..." "Despite narrowly losing the popular vote [in 2000], Bush won religious Catholics by the same margin Ronald Reagan did in his 1984 landslide." In reading today's and yesterday's articles, you should see how well Vatican-inspired political OPS in the US dovetail with Bush's meticulous efforts to reach out to Catholic voters. From the viewpoint of the Vatican, the Plan to control US politics is going well. You can be sure that Bush advisors are meeting with bishops and other, less obvious, Vatican players at every step of the way during Bush's first term as president. Whatever press releases coming out of the Vatican may be saying about the impending war on Iraq, the true rulers of the Vatican and Bush are in sync on this issue. That is how quid pro quo works. The quid, in this case, was the organized Catholic support in the last two elections. The quo is the Vatican getting what it wants from the White House. Not everything it wants, and not right away, but more and more of what it wants as time passes. In view of all this, might we dare imagine that one of the owners of ES&S, the largest vote-management firm in the world, has ties to the Vatican? As I wrote yesterday, just such an owner, listed as Charter Oaks, is a subsidiary of Rothschild, Inc., the firm mentioned in the Encyclopedia Judaica as the managers of the Vatican treasury.

Think about the potential implications of THAT subterranean scenario. Download RULERS OF EVIL Chapter 1 ================================================================================ ulers of Evil was published by HarperCollins just weeks before September 11, 2001. None of the big papers reviewed it. I'm told this is because I look at history a little too eccentrically. Well, okay. The standard approach is to regard history as so many persons in control of themselves doing what they think is the right thing. My approach is to look at history as so many persons under religious oath doing, whether right or wrong, what their superiors are divinely authorized to command them to do. The different approaches yield different pictures. Many readers believe that mine, call it “the ROE filter,” yields the true one. The ROE filter screens out emotionalism and bigotry. It grinds no axes. Nor does it judge or condemn. It builds peace, security, and confidence on a foundation of complicated forces understood. The ROE filter reveals what individuals are authorized to do. If a woman is authorized by a legitimate power in pursuit of justice to conspire or assassinate or steal or deceive, the ROE filter presumes she does her job well. If a man has taken an oath to suspend his own values in order to obey those of a legitimate superior in pursuit of justice, the ROE filter credits him with fidelity. Writing about September 11, Andrew Sullivan declared in the New York Times “This Is A Religious War.” Bravo, Andrew! And how’s this for religious war as policy? “NOW, THEREFORE, I, GEORGE W. BUSH, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim Friday, September 14, 2001, as a National Day of Prayer and Remembrance for the Victims of the Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001. I ask that the people of the United States and places of worship mark this National Day of Prayer and Remembrance with noontime memorial services, the ringing of bells at that hour, and evening candlelight remembrance vigils.” The President has repeatedly termed government’s response to 9/11 “a Crusade.” The ROE filter credits the President with correctly understanding that the term “Crusade” defines religious war undertaken by the Roman Papacy in the 11th, 12th, and 13th centuries to win the Holy Land from the Muslims. Bravo, Mr. President! Every oathbound official deserves the presumption that he means what he says. The President deserves no less. Therefore, how can I but conclude that the American people are funding a Roman Catholic military venture? If this strikes you as odd, then perhaps you can make use of the following pages. They may help you abide the next few years of crusade...

biding in Religious War / 2 1. Religious war involves subtleties and complexities beyond (or beneath) the discernment of most media-pundit political scientists, textbook historians, and respected public figures. In religious war, a great deal of unverified information is prepared, broadcast and obediently received as factual. Well-disciplined energies are spent establishing possible untruths as articles of faith. The American people, their government, and the world community seem quite comfortable with a theory of 9/11 that is rich in questionable data. For example: * Why the uninvestigated discrepancy between the stated number of passengers on the deadly jetliners and the passenger lists themselves? * Why the uninvestigated phenomenon of “an accused hijacker's passport” that reportedly sailed free of the plane’s pulverizing incineration (how many other passports sailed free?) so that officials might recover it two blocks away? * Why was the miraculous passport bearer’s name withheld when so many other hijacker names, all Arab, were publicized? * Why the uninvestigated fact that none of the publicized Arab names appear on the airlines' passenger lists? * Why the uninvestigated possibility that the hijackers might have boarded the jets without tickets? * Why the uninvestigated fact that British PM Tony Blair’s declaration on October 3 that “I have seen absolutely powerful and incontrovertible evidence of (bin Laden's) links to the events of September 11,” spoken with the force of a verdict of guilt on bin Laden in the court of international opinion, is supported only by a list of hearsay? * Why the unmentioned fact, in recent announcements that a “brand new” type of unmanned reconnaissance plane, the Global Hawk, was now flying over Afghanistan, that a Boeing 737-sized Global Hawk flew unmanned from California to Australia last May? * Why the uninvestigated possibility (first articulated by Carol Valentine) that the 9/11 jets might have been implanted with Global Hawk remote guidance systems? * Why the uninvestigated possibility that the planes might have served as spectacular eye-catchers to divert attention away from secondary explosions in the twin towers designed to destroy evidence? According to terrorism expert Van Romero, Arab terrorists routinely support diversionary explosions with more elaborate secondary bombs. * Why no interest in the fact that Dr. Romero, who happens to be vice-president for research at New Mexico Tech, one of the government's leading counter-terrorist contractors, (a) candidly told the Albuquerque Journal on 9/11 that the towers’ collapse could only have happened with the help of secondary demolition explosives, and (b) ten days later retracted his statement? * Why no interest in the fact that the professional debate on the towers’ collapse seems determined to arrive at any suitable explanation short of controlled implosion? Leslie Robertson, WTC’s structural engineer, was asked by a reporter how long, once he’d learned of the crashes, he thought the buildings would stand. Mr. Robertson replied (in the November 19 issue of New Yorker magazine), “I can’t...I think there are times when logic just isn’t the right way to think.” Is that it? Must we look beyond logic – the laws of physics – to explain why the towers collapsed as they did? * Why the uninvestigated discrepancy between (a) official claims that Osama bin Laden is the mastermind of a type of act that is perfected only when the perpetrator accepts responsibility for it, and (b) Osama bin Laden's denial of responsibility? * Why the uninvestigated possibility that President Bush might have been speaking truthfully when he told an audience (to cut to the chase, search "Jordan" and scroll down) December 4th that he witnessed on television the morning of September 11 something untelevised to the rest of the world: the first WTC crash? Might this have been a private transmission from a government camera trained expectantly on the target? * Why haven't commercial media plunged enthusiastically into these issues in search of truth? Who has power to keep them from doing so?

These are just some of the mysteries, but as we apply the ROE filter, most will solve themselves. 2. In religious war there are more combatants than meet the eye. The “attack on America” resulted in an increased American presence in the Arab world. The alleged perpetrators meant to achieve the opposite objective – to run American military out of the Arab world. * Is such a colossal failure consistent with the brilliance of the attack’s execution? * Or could bin Laden and his associates be an “Oswald” funded by a combatant so powerful that it can conceal itself from world imagination? 3. In religious war the apparent belligerents are often deceived out of knowing who it is they're really fighting, and why. Consequent to 9/11, American citizens have shackled themselves with steep tax debt by permitting their representatives to make war of indeterminate duration on a worldwide enemy called “terrorism,” whose adherents are “evildoers.” The intangibility of the enemy permits unlimited interchange of targets, battlefields, and causes. Already information has surfaced that the Phoenix office of the FBI circulates a booklet for local law enforcement personnel that describes as “terrorists” various domestic politically-active organizations, some of them religious in character, who had nothing whatsoever to do with 9/11. Many persons associated with these organizations imagined themselves defenders of American institutions, not enemies. Why no vigorous public discussion as to the possibility that 9/11 was engineered by an unknown beneficiary to secure drastic reduction in safeguards of the rights of citizens to assemble, petition for redress, and speak freely – a reduction Congress could not have achieved in peacetime? Why is that those interested in examining all the evidence are branded enemies of the state? 4. In religious war victory is often gained long before the first battle is joined, and the loser's mind is so boggled that identifying the winner is quite beyond him. This is because religious war, according to the Bible, is not about flesh and blood but about principalities, powers, the rulers of the darkness of this world, and spiritual wickedness in high places. The pattern of religious war begins with unperceived victory by an unimagined winner over an unwitting loser, followed by an outworking of historico-theatrical war, consisting of organized bloodshed conducted by officials for the people's participation, observation, and commemoration. Thus, 9/11 may have inaugurated the historico-theatrical war following America's earlier, unperceived defeat by a combatant the citizenry cannot imagine. Such a bewildering state of affairs is normal in religious war. By way of example, take the American Revolution, a religious war if there ever was one. Some important background. Prior to and during the Revolution, the colonies of New England were split into unequal religious factions, mainly Christian. Christianity itself had been split since at least the fourth century between Biblicists and Romanists. The former held that a loving, eternal relationship with God required intelligent and prayerful reading of the sacred scriptures of Israel, including the gospel of Jesus Christ. The latter held that the same relationship required following these same scriptures, but only as interpreted by the Church of Rome, and pronounced by its Bishop, the Pope. For Romanists, reading scripture was a dangerous pastime that could put one in possibly fatal conflict with the Church. Gutenberg technology, which made Bibles available to the masses, forced a crisis on the Church of Rome. Catholics reading the Bible for the first time joyously discovered that God spoke directly through printed words, and his message conflicted with the Pope's.

Biblicists soon came to be called Protestants because the Bible led them to protest many of the Church of Rome's most cherished traditions as offensive to the God of scripture. Bible-reading threatened the Church's authority to such an extent that extremities were resorted to. In 1540, Pope Paul II issued the bull Regimini militantis ecclesiae (“On the Supremacy of the Church Militant”). RME ordained a clandestine military priesthood to resume the Crusades that were discontinued in the 13th century. The new order inherited the rich legacy of the Knights Templars (with their elaborate secret network called Freemasonry) to wage religious war on departed believers – to retrieve, occupy, or destroy them, and in any event to defeat Protestantism by deception, manipulation, indoctrination, entertainment, and terror. Their corporate name was Company (or Society) of Jesus, soon shortened to “Jesuits,” and massive bylaws called “Constitutions” were drawn up by founding father Ignatius Loyola. The Jesuit Constitutions provide for a Superior General elected for life and due unquestioning obedience from his priestly soldiers. In the General’s person, Jesuits are required to see Jesus Christ.

(Pursuant to the Constitutions, Padre Pozzo’s ceiling in the magnificent Jesuit Church of the Gesù in Rome glorifies Ignatius Loyola, the first Jesuit General, in whose central radiance Jesus is still burdened by the cross.) Working under the maxim taught by their own moralists “If the end is good, the means are legal,” the Jesuits established colleges, universities and masonic lodges that linked budding political and mercantile princes – Catholic and Protestant alike – in learning more from the Aristotelian humanities than the Bible. By 1622, the Jesuits were openly celebrating their infiltration, occupation, and defeat of Protestantism. Within two centuries of their founding, all western civilization was developing according to Jesuit educational techniques. Three of the Company’s grander successes were modern monetized indebtedness, the modern masonic lodge, and the Age of Enlightenment. Enough background. Now to the Revolution. In 1758, Protestant biblicism was the state religion.of both Great Britain and the colonies. Roman Catholicism claimed no more than 1% of the American colonists. “Catholics in New England,” said John Adams, “are rarer than earthquakes.” Because Catholicism smacked of treason, with its implicit obedience to the Papal Mitre over the British Crown, most of colonial America denied Catholics the right to vote, to hold public office, to own property, or even to worship in their customary forms. Came the Revolution, it never entered the Protestant majority’s mind to allow their despised co-inhabitants to function politically. Between 1758 and 1775 the colonists suffered England’s “long train of abuses and usurpations.”

Few realized that the many apparently spontaneous acts of tyranny (and decisive reactions thereto) were in fact pages of a rough script written in the mind of Jesuit Superior General Laurence Richey and executed through the Jesuits’ secret masonic bridge into the Protestant ruling classes on both sides of the Atlantic. Richey’s script called for no less than motivating rebellious colonial energies to divide from England (its Bible, King, Parliament, and Church) and form a new, independent national government which could be legitimately occupied and eventually controlled by Roman Catholic lay-persons. To distance his army from suspicion of complicity, General Richey made his Jesuits virtually invisible. He did this by arranging for European monarchs under his obedience to persecute and tyrannize his own men during the very years the colonists were suffering their tyranny. It was sublime oriental warfare, memorialized by General Richey's publication in 1772 of Sun-Tzu's Art of War (the first translation of this masterpiece from the original Manchurian into a western language). “When you are strong,”said Sun-Tzu, “make it appear that you are weak.” In 1773 the Pope condemned the Jesuits to perfect weakness, and placed them under perfect cover, by dissolving the Company “for all eternity.”

Pope Clement XIV informing the Spanish ambassador of the "dissolution, extinction, and quite abolition" of the Jesuit priesthood. (From a contemporary engraving) (Since the Pope’s word was to be trusted, no one dreamed that the order would be resurrected in 1814.) Laurence Richey’s war of Catholic liberation was won when the Continental Congress adopted its Declaration of the Causes and Necessities of Taking Up Arms in August 1775. English-speaking Protestantism was thus irreparably divided. The real war was over before it began. All the rest—the battles, the legends, the heroes and the villains, the endless philosophical speculations, the enraging and the moving human interest stories of tragedy and hope and separation and reunion—this was the historico-theatrical production made possible by the fundamental circumstance for the people's participation, observation, empathy, celebration, and commemoration. Flesh-and-blood combatants, colonists against tyrants, masked the true combatants, non-existent Jesuits against unsuspecting Protestants. Church Militant’s momentous victory over America was proved with the ratification of Article VI of

the Constitution in 1789 – "No religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States." The remarkable irony (religious war is invariably ironic) is that Roman Catholicism's most ardent enemies had dedicated their lives, fortunes, and sacred honour to surrendering their political scepter to. . . the Papacy. Evidence of the success? Georgetown University, the incubator of American governmental policy, domestic and foreign, was founded by one of those non-existent Jesuit priests, John Carroll, who also was made America’s first Roman Catholic Bishop. Georgetown is still owned and operated by the Jesuits. Consult any comprehensive Congressional directory and you’ll find that the Congressional committees and subcommittees regulating nearly all aspects of American life are chaired by Roman Catholic lay-persons. Reflect on the United States seals, mottoes, customs, imagery, architecture, and archaeology and you’ll find an intense dedication to eternal Rome. Archaeology? Example: the land on which the U.S. Capitol is situated was Jesuit real estate that had been known for a hundred years prior to the Revolution as “Rome.” And who chose the property to become the Capitol site? Its owner, Bishop Carroll’s Jesuit-trained brother Daniel, a signer of the Declaration of Independence who also happened to be the Commissioner appointed by President Washington to find a site for the new federal city. (These facts were openly boasted by the Church until the mid-20th century, when they were stricken from the Catholic Encyclopedia and removed from acceptable conversation.) More evidence? Witness how Jesuit warfare has silenced American Protestantism. Scholarly biblicists describe the way Protestantism has morphed into a lifestyle demonstrably more Babylonian than Christian with the term “post-Christian America.” 5. Religious war is funded not by money but by the love of money. Money in law and Bible is quite different from the money we use. Legal and biblical money (as shall be documented presently) is gold and silver. Beginning in 1913, the Church Militant persuaded Americans to exchange their gold and silver for notes of indebtedness, which were then made to circulate as money. (This is done through “legal tender” laws that permit debts to be settled in something other than gold and silver coin.) Debt money worked because it was infinitely easier than precious metals to produce, and therefore could be created by the truckload. It played on human narcissism and shot-logic. “Everybody loves money,” as the Danny DeVito character in David Mamet's Heist reasoned. “That’s why they call it money.” To underwrite war.... Abiding in Religious War / 3 To underwrite war was as easy as designing a menace that existing resources could not overcome, which necessitated borrowing. Borrowing created indebtedness, but the indebtedness was dignified with circulation as currency, so who complained over a greater abundance of currency? Abundance of currency might result in stratospheric prices, but not if enough could be “sunk,” that is, retired from circulation through the instrument of income taxation. Income tax laws also influenced spending habits in ways most beneficial to the money creators. The money deception should not have buffaloed the biblicists, but it did. The Bible quite unsophisticatedly calls debt money that masquerades as gold and silver “a false balance” (Proverbs 11:1). Dollars of indebtedness marketed as Dollars of money are clearly “divers weights, and divers measures”condemned in Proverbs 20:10, which goes on to say “both of them are alike abomination to the Lord.” Too, every time we endorse a check, every time we accept

Federal Reserve cash, we make ourselves surety for the amount of debt represented. We guarantee the debt will be paid. Although it feels great receiving debt money, it's a form of addiction that—like smoking or recreational drugs—can lead to terrible consequences. The Bible strenuously warns against it: “He that is surety for a stranger shall smart for it: and he that hateth suretiship is sure.” (Proverbs 11:15) The phenomenon by which Congress placed America, and by domino effect the world, on the abomination of a divers-weight-divers-measures monetary system happened in three steps over some 55 years. * Step 1. In 1913, Congress established the Federal Reserve system and authorized it to create an expanding currency, along with a bureau of internal revenue to regulate its volume. The currency was redeemable in gold and silver, pursuant to the Bible (“The silver is mine, and the gold is mine, saith the Lord of hosts.”– Haggai 2:8), and Article I Section 10 of the Constitution (“No State shall make any Thing but Gold and Silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts”). * Step 2. In 1933, with Article I Section 10 still in effect, a presidential executive order from Franklin D. Roosevelt prohibited redemption of Federal Reserve currency in promised gold. This meant there was now a note called Dollar and a weight of gold called Dollar, and the two were not freely exchangeable both ways. * Step 3. Finally, with Article I Section10 still in effect, Congress passed the Coinage Act of 1965, which enforced acceptance of Dollar paper, Dollar monetized Federal Reserve debt, and cheap copper Dollar tokens as payment of debts contracted in Dollar silver. During 1967, promises of redemption in Dollar silver engraved on Dollar currency ceased to be honored in banks or the United States Treasury, and new currency was printed with no Dollar promises at all. It had taken 55 years, but the American people had made themselves surety for their government's unchecked indebtedness to the Federal Reserve. This meant that the tithes paid to and received by all Christian churches, not to mention Jewish synagogues and Muslim mosques, were making those institutions surety for governmental borrowing. Worse, the tithes consisted of a substance declared an abomination by Yahweh and Allah alike, since Islamic Law does not permit the use of a promise of payment as a medium of exchange. Under the holy monetary system, since gold and silver can only be earned into circulation, money is a reward for labor. Under the “abomination standard,” money is created and regulated by licensed dignitaries to reward, first, their chosen projects and afterward the labor of all who buy and sell using the abomination. Divers weights and measures is the system that sustains an autocracy which creates the money to pay for its invisibility while it regulates the value of all property, liberty, and life by expanding and contracting the money supply—which happens when the Federal Reserve Chairman lowers or raises the interest rates on indebtedness. This cannot easily be done with constitutional and biblical gold and silver. It is doable only with the people's love of a false balance and their disregard for the biblical admonitions on suretiship. Debt money is the ideal medium for an evil-tending society, funding war as well as anti-war, drug addiction as well as rehabilitation, and criminal activity as well as its prosecution. The scriptures do not lie when they say “Love of money is the root of all evil.” While American money was disintegrating and the unperceived autocracy increasing its hold, devout Catholics, Protestants, Jews, and Muslims might have united in a firm stand on Proverbs 11:15 —"He that hateth suretiship is sure," and Deuteronomy 25:15 — "Thou shalt have a perfect and just weight, a perfect and just measure shalt thou have: that thy days may be lengthened in the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee." They might have made provisions to coin God's own property themselves, gold and silver, as money for use among members and acceptable as tithes. There is no law prohibiting this, the people of God have a right to do this, and it might even have pressured Congress into restoring constitutional money.

In fact, the only religious minister I know of who dared talk about the nature of debt-based money was a Roman Catholic priest named Charles Coughlin. Reaching millions during the 1930s via costly NBC and CBS radio broadcasts supported by enthusiastic grassroots contributors, Father Coughlin rudely exposed the Roosevelt administration’s subtle war on constitutional monetary value. The Vatican supported Roosevelt. Coughlin’s popularity was a concern. His monetary preaching had become an obstacle to the president’s 1940 re-election campaign. In 1939, Jesuit Superior General Vladimir Ledochowski sent Vatican Secretary of State Eugenio Pacelli to New York with secret orders for Father Coughlin. His Eminence, soon to become Pius XII (ordained “Hitler’s Pope” by Catholic historian John Cornwell), told Coughlin personally to shut up lest Roosevelt lose the election. Coughlin obeyed, closed his show, and spent the remaining 39 years of his life off the airwaves. American Jesuits, who are famous for their secular politico-economic activism, have never lifted a finger to urge the states to obey Article I Section 10 of the Constitution and make no thing but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debts. (Imagine the stabilizing political and economic impact of a papal encyclical authorizing American bishops to provide a biblical coinage to (a) purify the tithes of 50,000,000 Catholics and (b) preserve the value of their trades!)

Most people, even the captains of the money business, really don't know the first thing about American money. When you have the time, set aside a few days to study A Caveat Against Injustice, the classic treatise by the framer of Article 1 Section 10, Roger Sherman. Influential Protestant evangelicals (not to mention their counterparts among the Jews and Muslims) have ignored the money as well. Clearly, the Church of Rome and its captive faiths have no desire to encourage Americans to know the biblical mandate for a perfect and just monetary system. One of religious war's chief objectives is to keep populations heavily indebted. Religious war cannot survive without it. I don’t use the term “captive faiths” unadvisedly. According to Church doctrine, and this is essential to understanding religious war, all faiths are subject to the Roman Pontiff. 6. The ultimate authority in religious war is the Roman Church Militant. The Church Militant still enforces the declaration made in 1302 by Pope Boniface VIII that "To be subject to the Roman Pontiff is to every human creature altogether necessary for salvation." If you disagree with this proposition, you are subject to conversion or annihilation— unless your disagreement is expressed in a form useful to the Church, such as influencing others to disagree with the proposition, or downplaying the Bible. If you agree, you are required to live in obedience to the law of the Church. These would seem to be the only available choices. But there is a third, one that agrees with the proposition yet excludes you from obedience to Church law. The third choice hinges on an objective determination of who is in need of salvation.

One cannot need salvation unless one is lost or endangered. Therefore, human creatures for whom salvation is necessary are those who are lost, or otherwise at peril. The Bible and the Roman Pontiff agree that all mankind is lost, in that we all fall short of the perfection required by God's justice to avoid the horrible consequences of sin, first brought to flesh by Adam's disobedience. The Bible and the Roman Pontiff also agree that any who desire to be spared these consequences have only to immerse themselves in the safeguard, the salvific process, established by God before the foundation of the world. The process involves admitting one's sinful nature and seeking and receiving forgiveness and perennial guidance from the spirit of Jesus Christ. Until saved, according to the Bible and the Roman Pontiff, human creatures are lost from God, in great peril, terribly endangered. All ways of life but the Christian deny the necessity of salvation. Ironically, their mere denial places them in the sphere of the Roman Pontiff. In the eyes of both Bible and Roman Pontiff, denying the necessity of salvation constitutes an admission of the need to be saved, which the Roman Pontiff correctly sees as a grant of jurisdiction by operation of law. Thus, the adherents of Islam, Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism, Freemasonry, Gnosticism, Deism, LDS, Astrology, Agnosticism, Pantheism, Atheism and all other spiritual disciplines, by their denial that Christ saves or that salvation is necessary, make themselves subject to – and can be legislated, judged, and executed upon by – the Roman Catholic Church. That this condition is widely unperceived is owed, in my opinion, to the extraordinary military skills of the Jesuits. Once a person is saved, of course, it would seem salvation is no longer needed, and that the Roman jurisdiction would atrophy. A truly saved person is no longer lost, imperiled, endangered. His body is now the habitation of Christ's holy, self-ruling spirit with its fruit of “love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, and temperance – against which there is no law” (Galatians 5:22). This is so with many saved people, but not within the Church Militant. The Roman Pontiff sustains general jurisdiction over Catholics by asserting that the salvific process can only be completed by pious works that must be performed throughout one's lifetime and beyond. This, despite the Bible's affirmation that salvation is completed only by Christ himself, and that pious works are merely evidence that one has been saved. With its doctrine of relative or incomplete salvation, the Church Militant keeps its congregations absolutely in need of salvation. The Roman Pontiff and his administrative hierarchy openly display the seals, titles, and ceremonial sacraments authorizing them to rule every unsaved human creature. These are not paraphernalia of ancient Christianity but of ancient Babylon. (For example, the papal distinction Pontifex maximus – “sovereign bridge-builder”– is a Babylonian term bequeathed to the Roman caesars and never contemporaneously applied to any disciple or apostle of Jesus.) In fact, abundant evidence suggests that this Babylonian link originates in the mark God placed upon Cain. This mark gave Cain, and apparently his spiritual descendants, immunity from, and sevenfold vengeance against, assailants — an obviously practical reason for Jesus to command his followers to love their enemies. In concert with their delegates in the secular political sphere, the hierarchy of Church Militant do indeed function in “the way of Cain” for the preservation of order and justice in an evil world. The attack on America appears to have been a disciplinary action meant to recruit the dedication of more human creatures, more human resources, in this task Abiding in Religious War / 4

7. The aim of religious war is always "new world order." In about 37 B.C., the Roman poet-propagandist Virgil published lines containing a prophecy from the “Sibyl,” a mystical personage who told the fortunes of Rome. According to ancient tradition, this Sibyl (there were several stationed around the classical world) was a thousand years old.

The Cumaean Sibyl by Michaelangelo In Virgil’s Fourth Eclogue, the Cumaean Sibyl divines that magnus ab integro seclorum nascitur ordo, “a mighty order of ages is born anew.” At the birth of this new order, “Justice returns, returns old Saturn’s reign, with a new breed of men sent down from heaven.” And a virgin gives birth to a new Apollo who will do away with human wickedness. This messiah Shall free the earth from never-ceasing fear. He shall receive the life of gods, and see Heroes with gods commingling, and himself Be seen of them, and with his father's worth Reign o'er a world at peace. Who was Virgil’s (or the Sibyl’s) messiah? Since the verses are addressed to the consul Asinius Pollio, many believed it was the son of Pollio, in whose consulate or presidency the mighty new order of ages would begin. But this theory proved wrong when Pollio’s son was born sickly and died in his infancy. People then centered on a son that might be born of Mark Antony and his wife Octavia, but this possibility was excluded when Mark left Octavia for Cleopatra. Four centuries later, the Emperor Constantine the Great presented a paper saying that Virgil had really prophesied the advent of Jesus and his new breed of men, the Christian, but had couched his prophecy in disguise to avoid offending Roman priests. This theory still has adherents today. The most logical Virgilian messiah, it seems to me, would be Augustus Caesar. We know Virgil’s career was subsidized by the billionaire Caius Maecenas, and that Maecenas had funded the rise of Julius Caesar. Following Julius’ bloody sacrifice by the conspirators in 44 B.C., there ensued a long religious war for command of the empire. The rivals were Mark Antony, Lepidus, and Julius’ grand-nephew and adopted son Octavian Maria. We know that Maecenas put his money on Octavian. We also know the Fourth Eclogue was published following the Peace of Brindisi, which reconciled Antony and Octavian and gave tremendous hope that Octavian would triumph. We know, too, that Octavian’s interests at the Brindisi negotiations were represented by none other than consul Asinius Pollio, who introduced Virgil to Maecenas. And we know that the ultimate payoff of Brindisi would be the rise of Octavian

to the supreme position of Pontifex Maximus of Rome in 28 B.C., with the holy name Augustus Caesar. We know that Octavian Caesar Augustus claimed to be the offspring of a union between a virgin the sun-god Apollo. And finally, we know that Virgil’s final masterpiece of propaganda identified Augustus as messianic. In the Aeneid (19 B.C.), set in a time prior to the founding of Rome, we see in Book 6 (lines 791-94) Anchises, father of the Trojan Aeneas, pointing out to his son the coming generations of Romans yet to be born and identifying one in particular: “This man, this is he whom you hear more and more often promised to you, Augustus Caesar, the seed of divinity, who shall establish golden ages for Latium through the fertile lands once ruled by Saturn.” Since the publication of Virgil’s messianic prophecy coincided with the strategy of a billionaire to place his man at the head of the universal Roman Church and State, how could the prophesied messiah have been anyone but Augustus Caesar? This is important, I think, because the Sibylline prophecy is part of the American political heritage. In 1782, Charles Thomson, the Perpetual Secretary of the Continental Congress, borrowed from the Fourth Eclogue and gave the United States its national motto Novus Ordo Seclorum. Thomson wrote that the motto signifies “the beginning of the new American Æra, which commences from [1776].” The American Æra was a new ordering of power in the world, a new republic that issued in a new kind of worldly order, which has been colloquialized to “new world order.” In credible though indirect testimony cited in Rulers of Evil, Charles Thomson himself indicates that novus ordo seclorum might define the United States government as Rome’s – the Church Militant’s – leading agency for the universal reordering of temporal or worldly power. Indeed, worldly power has been ordered anew many times since the days of Augustus Caesar. New orders are necessary because evil is evasive and creative. Ruling a planet largely populated and often disrupted by evildoers requires the cyclical extermination and rebirth of human-management systems. This is not easily done. A 65-year-old person has experienced the reordering of the world by the United States at least three times. Each of these reorderings, as with that of Maecenas and Octavian in 28 B.C., was precipitated by elegant slaughter suggestive of human sacrifice. With Pearl Harbor, Hiroshima, and Nagasaki, World War II established the United Nations and a fundamental international currency, the US dollar. The Coinage Act of 1965, received uncritically by an electorate still disoriented from JFK's assassination, absolved banks and the national treasury of any responsibility to redeem the fundamental international currency in gold and silver coin, enabling Congress to create (by borrowing into circulation) money to pay its debts domestically and globally. President Bush the Elder’s Persian Gulf War, punctuated by the Younger's War on Terrorism, beckoned all nations to marry America at gunpoint and together bring the whole world under an increasingly dynamic rulership of the Roman Pontiff. This most recent reordering – the subject of what I’m writing here – can conveniently be traced to the elder Bush’s first act as President, which was the uttering of a prayer. On the day of his inaugural, January 20, 1989, George H.W. Bush was a virtual Roman Catholic due to his confirmation into a church – the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States – whose first bishop was ordained in 1784 at Aberdeen, Scotland, by three bishops who notoriously declared allegiance to the Roman Pontiff. Most of his adult life, G.H.W. Bush had been a member, and for a while director, of the Central Intelligence Agency, an organization founded in 1947 by William J. (“Wild Bill”) Donovan for the purpose of providing “special means” to insure Vatican influence over the secular world and subsidized by American taxpayers. Donovan was a devout Roman Catholic, decorated in July

1944 by Pope Pius XII with the Grand Cross of the Order of St. Sylvester, “the Vatican’s highest award, for a lifetime of public and secret service to the [Roman] Catholic Church.” It is said (and I can only speculate) that Mr. Bush was also a 33rd-degree Freemason, and a member as well of Propaganda Dùe (P2), the shadowy masonesque society made up of leading French, German, Italian, and American business, political, and media leaders dedicated to the Roman Church Militant. (If anyone knows of an authentic proof or denial to either association, please notify me. Proving secret memberships is a hard task, since rulers of evil engage in activities that must of necessity be concealed. I believe I do my subject no harm by relying on Christ’s teaching how to discern: “By their fruits ye shall know them.” Mr. Bush bears the fruits – many good, many evil – of one secretly associated with powers that work in darkness.) There is no doubt, however, that on inauguration day 1989, President Bush had amassed a fortune in oil, principally through his Zapata Offshore Petroleum, a company whose global network of offices fed information to and from the CIA. One of Zapata’s most prosperous clients was the tiny Muslim emirate of Kuwait. Qualified by the above, George Bush the Elder began his presidential inaugural address, and his presidency, with a prayer in the following words: Heavenly Father...Make us strong to do Your work, willing to heed and hear Your will, and write on our hearts these words: ‘Use power to help people.' For we are given power not to advance our own purposes, nor to make a great show in the world, nor a name. There is but one just use of power, and it is to serve people. Help us to remember it, Lord. Amen. President Bush then went to the Vatican City to have an audience with Pope John Paul II. At the conclusion of the audience, His Holiness cited the President’s first official act, that inaugural prayer. “Mr. President,” said the Pope, “you made reference to power as existing to help people, to serve people. This is true at different levels, including power at the political and economic level. We see this, too, at the level of each community, with its power of fraternal love and concern. In all these areas, an immense challenge opens up before the United States in this third century of her nationhood. Her mission as a people engaged in good works and committed to serving others has horizons the length of your nation and far beyond – as far as humanity extends. Today the interdependence of humanity is being reaffirmed and recognized through world events. The moral and social attitudes that must constitute a response to this interdependence is found in worldwide solidarity. In treating this question in a recent encyclical, I have stated that solidarity is not a feeling of vague compassion or shallow distress at the misfortunes of so many people both near and far. On the contrary, it is a firm and persevering determination to commit oneself to the common good; that is to say, to the good of all and of each individual, because we are all really responsible for all. Truly, the hour of international interdependence has struck. What is at stake is the common good of humanity. Can anyone deny that on May 27, 1989 the Pope was summoning America to use its power to help people achieve a new worldwide solidarity? In the 18th century, achieving worldwide solidarity meant stirring up internal strife to divide English-speaking Protestantism into British and American factions and creating the right of Catholics to hold office in the latter. In our present time, achieving worldwide solidarity means dividing the Muslim nations by internal strife, conquering them by an alliance of governments led by the United States, and subjecting them to the Catholic process known as “missionary

adaptation.” This term is explained by the 1989 Catholic Almanac (p175) as “the adjustment of the mission subject to the cultural requirements of the mission object” so that the Pontiff’s needs will be brought “as much as possible in accord with existing socially shared patterns of thought, evaluation, and action, so as to avoid unnecessary and serious disorganization.” In simpler terms, the Pope on May 27, 1989 called on America’s secular might to lead the Middle East into a new culture structured, like Japan after Nagasaki, on the Roman Catholic invention of debt-instruments circulating and enforced internationally as money. September 11th catapulted the world toward achieving this order. But the momentum began in Kuwait, of which the elder President Bush was a venerated patron. Do you recall how the Persian Gulf War started in Kuwait? During 1989, Kuwait launched an unprovoked economic aggression against its much larger neighbor, Iraq. Kuwait began overproducing oil, which drove oil prices downward, a policy that would ultimately cost Iraq some $14 billion in lost revenues. At about the same time, for no apparent reason, America's allies began imposing de facto sanctions on Iraq. Iraqi Deputy Prime Minister Ramadan would tell the Muhammad Ali Peace Delegation on November 30, 1990 that “by 1990, hundreds of major scientific, engineering, and food supply contracts between Iraq and western governments were cancelled.” Finally, on May 28-30, 1990, Iraqi premier Saddam Hussein formally complained of Kuwait’s economic warfare at a meeting of the brotherhood of Muslim nations known as the League of Arab States. Saddam hinted at military action if the situation was not corrected. The Emir of Kuwait, whose country is one-tenth the size of Iraq, ignored Saddam. Students of the Gulf War are generally agreed that the Emir had received assurances from American officials that his advantages over Iraq would be protected by American armed forces. Kuwait further aggravated Iraq. On July 15-17, Saddam Hussein accused Kuwait of using slant drilling technology to steal oil from Iraq’s Rumaylah oil field. Waging economic war against and stealing from a brother are both counted sins in Islamic law, which held correctional procedures. On August 2, Iraq invaded Kuwait. Photos from Soviet commercial satellites show that no more than a few thousand troops were deployed – a sufficient number to hold Kuwait City. Next day, in accord with Islamic law, the council of ministers of the Arab League resolved to (a) condemn the invasion, (b) convoke an extraordinary summit to find a Muslim solution to the crisis, and (c) reject foreign intervention, whether direct or indirect, in Muslim affairs. Saddam Hussein made it clear that he was willing to withdraw if his claims against Kuwait could be satisfied. There was no reason why Muslim brethren, acting in good faith, could not settle the matter. In fact, on August 4th Saddam was so confident of peaceful resolution that Baghdad radio announced that Iraq was ready to pull out of Kuwait the next day. But peaceful resolution between Muslim states would not serve the Roman Pontiff’s grand agenda for “worldwide solidarity.” For this, political Islam must be divided and conquered. Which exactly occurred when two crucial members of the summit, Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak and King Fahd of Saudi Arabia, turned against Iraq. They did so, according to a study by Hugh Roberts of the London School of Economics & Political Science, under pressure from U.S. Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney. “What then happened,” wrote Roberts, “was a massive escalation of the crisis engineered wholly

and entirely by the United States, which split the Arab world down the middle, destroyed the credibility and influence of the Arab League and scotched all chance of a peaceful settlement.” On August 7, President Bush despatched aircraft and 4,000 American combat troops to Saudi Arabia. This was not an invasion of Iraq. The troops were “strictly defensive,” sent to protect Saudi Arabia from an imminent Iraqi invasion. However, King Hussein of Jordan would inform the New York Times that American troops were being deployed to Saudi Arabia long before Saddam moved on Kuwait. [Times, Oct. 16, 1990] Furthermore, King Hussein would say in the same report that he was told by Saudi King Fahd that there was no evidence of a hostile Iraqi build-up on the Saudi border; and that despite American assertions, there was no truth to reports that Iraq planned to invade Saudi Arabia. Fahd’s remark is corroborated by Soviet satellite photographs taken on August 8 which show light sand drifts over patches of roads leading from Kuwait City to the Saudi border – and no evidence of an Iraqi buildup. Seeing that the United States was interceding to prevent a Muslim solution, Saddam declared the annexation of Kuwait on August 8. This did not mean that Iraq was no longer willing to consider a withdrawal. On the contrary, writes Hugh Roberts, it was Saddam’s way of preserving the issue until the summit could entertain fresh proposals during its August 9-10 meeting in Cairo. But when the summit convened, delegates sat down to find the issue already decided by a “draft resolution” presented by Egypt and Saudi Arabia, written in English and translated into Arabic, and pre-supported by 10 other states, constituting a majority. (Iraq was not present.) The resolution condemned the Iraqi decision to annex Kuwait, called for the immediate withdrawal of Iraqi troops from Kuwait, affirmed Kuwaiti sovereignty, and agreed to respond positively to the requests of Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states to send Muslim forces to Kuwait’s defense. It was made clear, at the insistence of the Bush administration, that “international law” was going to be enforced on Iraq, despite the fact that many previous acts of aggression by other Muslim states had gone unpunished under international law. Hugh Roberts writes: “The unity which had existed within the Arab world on August 3 had been shattered by August 10. The possibility of a peaceful, negotiated, [Muslim] solution to the Gulf crisis was dead, killed by US pressure.” Saddam Hussein’s reaction was to submit proposals on August 12th (and again in December, as reported by Knute Royce in Newsday) for a comprehensive settlement of all outstanding Islamic territorial conflicts according to international law. He proposed that the Muslim states be judged equitably. He was willing to let Iraq’s transgressions be judged by international law if the Muslim leaders who claimed to be upholding it would let their national transgressions be judged by the same standard. Saddam’s proposal was rejected out of hand by the United States. “From that moment on,” states Hugh Roberts, “the Anglo-American and UN position lacked all legal and moral authority in the eyes of the vast majority of the Arab and Muslim world.” In my opinion, what the Muslim world did not understand is that it is lawful for the Church Militant, pursuant to its building "worldwide solidarity" for better rulership of evil, to immunize favored subjects from the rigors of equity and international law. The Gulf War facts bear out the proposition advanced in Rulers of Evil that God rules by a single standard, which provides that evildoers – persons who deny the deity and unique saving power of Christ – deserve to be ruled by a double standard. This is the fundamental fact of human life. “I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both you and your seed may live.” (Deuteronomy 30:19)

On August 15, 1990, John Paul II announced his Apostolic Constitution on Catholic Universities. In this decree, the Pope made Catholic teaching, research and service responsible for administering the new world order under construction by the United States in the Middle East. Distinguishing a Catholic university “by its free search for the whole truth about nature, man and God,” of which “the present age is in urgent need,” His Holiness directed that the whole Catholic university system, holding “fidelity to the Christian message as it comes to us through the Church,” should aim for "a more just sharing in the world's resources, and a new economic and political order that will better serve the human community at a national and international level." Within three weeks, President Bush explained to a joint session of Congress that he only acted to check Saddams aggression after “120,000 [Iraqi] troops with 850 [Iraqi] tanks had poured into Kuwait and moved south to threaten Saudi Arabia.” However, Jean Heller would report several months later in the St. Petersburg (FL) Times that Soviet satellite photos shot on the very day the President had addressed Congress failed to back up his claim of an imminent Iraqi threat. In fact, there was no sign of any massing along the Kuwait-Saudi border whatsoever. The Pentagon was claiming some 250,000 Iraqi troops were occupying Kuwait, yet refused to show evidence that might contradict the Soviet satellite photos. In these photos, American forces, encampments, aircraft, camouflaged equipment dumps, staging areas and tire-tracks across the desert can easily be seen. But analysts could find nothing like this to indicate an Iraqi presence anywhere in Kuwait. Peter Zimmerman, formerly of the U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency in the Reagan administration, and a former image specialist for the Defense Intelligence Agency, analyzed the satellite photos for Heller’s article in the St. Petersburg Times and concluded: We don’t see any tent cities, we don’t see congregations of tanks, we can’t see troop concentrations, and the main Kuwaiti air base appears deserted. It’s five weeks after the invasion, and from what we can see, the Iraqi air force hasn’t flown a single fighter to the most strategic air base in Kuwait. There is no infrastructure to support large numbers of [soldiers]. They have to use toilets, or the functional equivalent. They have to have food. But where is it? One week later, the Pentagon was issuing reports that Iraqi forces in Kuwait had grown to 360,000 men and 2,800 tanks – yet the satellite photos of southern Kuwait show no evidence of such. Nor did the Pentagon ever support its claim with evidence. Jean Heller’s revelations would never be picked up by the national media. Huda al-Yassiri would report in The Baghdad Observer for June 8, 1996 that “the St. Petersburg Times editors approached the Associated Press twice about running her story on the wire, but to no avail. Likewise, the Scripps-Howard news service, of which the St. Petersburg Times is a member, chose not to distribute the story.” Of course, Iraqi troops eventually appeared at the Saudi Arabian border. But “they were sent there as a response to U.S. buildup and were not a provocation for Bush's military action,” reported Brian Becker, an investigator with the Commission of Inquiry for the International War Crimes Tribunal. On December 17, the U.N. set a January 15, 1991 deadline for Iraqi withdrawal from Kuwait. President Bush promised to send Secretary of State James Baker to meet Saddam Hussein before the deadline, but reneged. Saddam rejected January 15 and offered to withdraw by February 15. President Bush ordered American planes to incinerate hundreds of women and children sleeping in the al-Arneriyah bomb shelter, and two days later rejected Saddam’s offer of a February withdrawal. On the 16th of January 1991, the President launched what has been called “the Gulf Massacre,”

in which between 85,000 and 100,000 Iraqis were killed because the United States (a) refused to countenance either a diplomatic or a legal solution to the Gulf crisis, and (b) acted between August 2 and August 10, 1990 to make both impossible. Concludes Hugh Roberts, “The true number of Iraqis who have been slaughtered in the greatest act of western folly and murderous arrogance in living memory may well be very much higher than this, of course.” On February 27th, coalition forces entered Kuwait City, and President Bush declared Kuwait liberated. Less than a week later in Rome, on March 4th, some 15 Catholic leaders from the Middle East, North Africa, Europe and America held a “postwar Gulf summit meeting.” Pope John Paul II addressed the opening of the summit saying that the war had only sharpened tensions in the region and “awakened distrust and rancor inherited from the past.” He denied that any religious war had taken place, yet rebuked Muslim countries that “do not allow Christian communities to take root, celebrate their faith and live it according to the demands of their confession.” Likewise, the summit’s final communique rejected all efforts to cast the war as “a conflict between Islam and Christianity.” Indeed, the war was not a conflict; it was an exercise in missionary adaptation to establish the new solidarity ordered by the Roman Pontiff. The summit’s final communique, issued on March 6th, provided Catholic believers, for the first time ever, with an agenda to work for secure boundaries for Israel, independence and unity for Lebanon, a homeland and self-determination for the Palestinians, multilateral demilitarization and economic development of the region, and the establishment of Jerusalem as the international “holy city” of Muslims, Christians, and Jews. David Scott opined in the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs that the Vatican Summit “may one day be recalled as an historic turning point in the Catholic Church’s involvement in the Middle East.” But we must remember that the turning point was the Persian Gulf War, an event created by deception and brute force. Had there been no Gulf War, there would have been no Vatican Summit. And had the American people heeded Christ's oft-repeated command "Be not deceived," there would have been no Gulf War. Significantly, it was on the Vatican Summit’s final day, March 6th, that President Bush delivered a speech before Congress that sounded more like a reassurance to the papacy than a report to the representatives of the American people: “Now, we can see a new world coming into view. A world in which there is the very real prospect of a new world order." 8. Human sacrifice is essential in religious war. The Cumaean Sibyl by Michaelangelo Saturn Devouring His Child by Francisco Goya According to Polybius, who lived and died more than a century before the Christian era, human sacrifice served a valid political purpose. Lives of human beings were ritualistically taken by priests “to maintain the cohesion of the Roman state,”– that is, “to hold the common people in check.” [See B. Twyman, The Ancient History Bulletin, 11.1 (1997) 1-11] But as Roman civilization imbibed Greek moral values, human sacrifice began offending the Roman sense of decency. The practice was finally banned by senatorial decree in 97 B.C., and prohibited among all peoples conquered by Rome. Human sacrifice became the indicator that distinguished Roman from barbarian. Livy called human sacrifice “a most un-Roman rite.” Yet the form wouldn’t quite go away. The people, encouraged by the priests, regarded gladiatorial deaths as sacrifices to deified spirits of the dead

known as Manes. And Livy’s contemporary, the outwardly decent Octavian Maria, upon assuming the title of Caesar Augustus in 28 B.C., sacrificed three hundred Roman senators on an altar in Perugia to atone for the assassination of his adoptive father, Julius Caesar. [A. Del Mar, The Worship of Augustus Caesar, p 318] This “most un-Roman rite” was just too politically expedient to give up entirely. Rulers periodically contrived sacrificial offerings of human flesh because it was the most efficient means of bending the naturally individualistic human species to the monarchic will. Witnessing violent human death can be deeply traumatizing. The spectacle informs the imagination, where thought begins. In its own emotional language, human sacrifice brutally and memorably implies two classes of mankind – the all-powerful and the all-helpless. Watching the all-helpless die creates in the viewer an emotional debt to the all-powerful. This debt permeates our thinking, and to stay alive we cannot conceive of disobeying the all-powerful sacrificer. Remember Polybius: humans were sacrificed “to maintain the cohesion of the Roman state...to hold the common people in check.” September 11th meets the criteria of human sacrifice except for one important element: the all-powerful sacrificer. If the sacrificer was the high priest of Muslim suicide, Osama bin Laden, as President Bush the younger seems to have convinced the nation and the world he is, who among its viewers is cohering in Osama's omnipotence? What population is being held in check by the Al-Qaeda or their god Allah? I know of none. So, either September 11th was not a classical human sacrifice or we have mistaken the sacrificer’s identity. Presuming human sacrifice, and bearing Polybius in mind, let’s approach it from the other end. Which state has achieved cohesion from September 11th? Which people are being held in check by its results? The answer to both questions is every nation within Rome’s sphere of influence, principally the United States. If one takes seriously the signs, symbols, and allegories with which American government publicly identifies its nature, purpose, and link with antiquity, some startling evidence appears. Of course, it could be argued that these elements are mere decoration and rather dated attempts to breathe poetic nobility into the federal enterprise. But the ROE filter does not presume the framers of American government were frivolous or irresponsible in communicating vital information through their official utterances. The ROE filter presumes competence and proficiency in every official act. We owe Congress the presumption that it knew what it was doing when it officially approved a national motto, novus ordo seclorum, borrowed from a Roman prophecy announcing the return of Saturn to power – “Justice returns, returns old Saturn’s reign.” If the American Æra (1776-to present) reintroduced the reign of Saturn, it’s not surprising that very few would notice. This is due to the fact that historically the character of Saturn maintains nearly no profile. His name is synonymous with secrecy, deriving from the Babylonian word stur (pronounced “satur”) meaning “hidden.” Stur was the earliest known deity of the Babylonian church/state. He was the “hidden god” whom only the initiated priests of the Babylonian Mysteries could access. Biblical scholar Alexander Hislop has noted that the letters of the hidden god in the Hebrew numeric alphabet add up to the number of the Beast in Revelation 13:18: S=060 T=400 U=006 R=200

_____ 000666 Stur’s relationship to Rome is well established by Roman authorities. Ovid, Pliny, and Aurelius Victor all tell us that the city Rome was built upon in the 8th century B.C. was called Saturnia, “city of Saturn.” Likewise, before the founding of Washington, D.C. in 1790-3 the land on which the Capitol building arose was listed in Maryland property records as “Rome.” This is made considerably more interesting by the installation in 1863 of the bronze “Freedom” atop the Capitol, D.C’s highest and most honored edifice. The statue stands exactly 19 feet, six inches in height, which works out to 6+6+6 feet, 6+6+6 inches. Designed and sculpted in Rome, it was considered by its creator to represent Persephone, a virgin goddess celebrated for her immaculate conception. Persephone is intimately bound to Saturn in pagan theology. She attracted the attention of Hades, who had been eaten alive by his father Saturn but saved and reconstituted by the heroic efforts of his brother Jupiter, and given dominion over the underworld, while Jupiter took the sky. Hades desired to marry Persephone, and when Jupiter forbade him, Hades kidnaped the beautiful goddess and made her his queen of gold, oil, and the rest of earth’s hidden wealth, including petroleum and pharmaceuticals. In some mythologies, Hades is identified with Saturn. And throughout Rome no structure was called “capitol” unless it was a temple to Jupiter. The sum of these facts strongly suggests, to me at least, that Virgil was prophesying for imperial Romans the same thing Congress was declaring to the inhabitants of the United States: a “golden-age” rulership in the style of ancient Babylon under a hidden god known only to his initiated priests. If Hislop’s calculations are right and Stur is indeed the Beast of Revelation whose name is “the number of a man,” Scripture may be telling us that Saturn began life as a man. The ancient historic person whose known attributes most resemble Saturn’s is, of course, Cain. Scripture describes both Cain and his parents as “hidden.” Adam and Eve, acquiring knowledge of good and evil by sinning, “hid” their nakedness from God. Cain prophesied that his punishment for murdering Abel was to be “hid” from the face of God. However, it was not Adam and Eve but Cain who established a city, the first historic city, Unuk, as its 19th-century discoverers spelled the word, named for Cain’s son Enoch. To build a city requires a central authority able to (a) maintain the cohesion of the state and (b) hold the common people in check – which, as we recall from Polybius, are the twin political justifications for human sacrifice. That Unuk was founded on human sacrifice is not an unreasonable supposition, since Cain owed the very existence of his city to a human sacrifice – his own sacrifice of Abel, which resulted in the vagabondage which sent him to the land of Nod. (See Rulers of Evil for a discussion of Abel’s murder as a sacrificial offering.) But to achieve the political benefits of human sacrifice one must be all-powerful, one must be feared as a god. Can we account for Cain’s transformation from a wicked murderer permanently exiled from his homeland to an all-powerful and “hidden God”? Scripture holds the key. God made Cain seven times more powerful than any man who might want to rid the earth of him, and sealed this unique grant with a mark. Here are the actual words at Genesis 4:15: And the LORD said unto him, Therefore whosoever slayeth Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold. And the LORD set a mark upon Cain, lest any finding him should kill him. The mark was limited strictly to assuring God’s vengeance against anyone who would threaten Cain’s life. When it came to matters of wisdom, correction, and instruction in righteousness, Cain could seek God’s counsel or, since he was hidden from the face of God, make up his own. Under

no circumstances was he permitted to attack those who “called upon the name of the Lord.” The mark signifies a covenant of retribution only; nothing else. And so, early on, Cain encouraged attacks upon his life so that he might infallibly defend himself. He found great profit in provoking enemies. The more enemies, the more spectacular the displays of vengeance. The more vengeance, the more justice. The more justice, the more power to Cain. A more powerful Cain could do more excellent public works. Thus, it became essential to the self-interest of the bearer of the mark – which to this day remains a first principle of ordered government – to provoke and encourage evildoing, particularly the form that manifests itself in rebellion. Archaeological discoveries at Unuk validate the sudden appearance, early in the third millenium B.C., of what we might expect of a man whose enemies would be divinely avenged sevenfold, of a man who was also the first child of parents who had eaten fruit of the tree of divine knowledge of good and evil. According to the Oxford scholar charged with examining the ruins of Unuk, Cain’s city was the seat of a vast empire, founded on slavery, “full of schools and libraries, of teachers and pupils, and poets and prose writers, and of the literary works which they had composed.”[Sayce, Babylonia & Syria] The empire was bound together by roads, along which there was a regular postal service, and you can see in the Louvre clay postage stamps bearing the name of Cain and his son Enoch. The library Cain built at Unuk housed the first collection of astronomical observations and terrestrial omens. There was incredibly artful metalworking, and Encyclopedia Britannica adds that “transparent glass seems to have been first introduced in the reign of [Cain].” And it all appeared suddenly. The London Times’ Historians’ History of the World grumbled “Surely such a people as this could not have sprung into existence. It must have had its history...” But Unuk as a social organization had no previous history – except that the parents of its founder had ingested the fruit of a tree that infused their DNA, and subsequently ours, with divine intellect at the expense of eternal life. Cain’s religion wrote the name of its “god of heaven” in cuneiform. The symbol is pronounced “Annu.” This “Annu signature” may be the very mark God set upon Cain to seal his authority. In any case, we find it consistently present in claims to rulership through its fifty centuries of existence. We find the Annu signature in the flag of Great Britain and in the United Nations logotype . We find it in the U.S. Supreme Court Building, where it forms the central decorative motif. We find it inlaid in the pavement surrounding the Obelisk of Caligula in St. Peter’s Piazza, where the multitudes stand to receive papal edicts and blessings.

If you would like to test whether or not an institution identified with this mark avenges its enemies sevenfold, try to rid the earth of the Roman Pontiff, or his two delegated powers, the U.S. and the U.K. or any of the powers under their protection. You will quickly find that the mark of the hidden god, Cain or Stur, is quite alive and well, still doing today what it was doing in the early days of Unuk – still avenging its enemies sevenfold or more; still creating, preserving, honoring, terrorizing, judging, and punishing evildoers; still sacrificing its own in order to solidify world order and hold people in check. Next: Muslims as villains.. Abiding in Religious War / 5 9. Muslims: Rome's designer villains “Ishmael will be a wild man; his hand will be against every man, and every man's hand against him; and he shall dwell in the presence of all his brethren.” —Genesis 16:11 “Islam did not arise in a backwater from some obscure Judaic-Christian sect, but arose in the full stream of religious life in Asia.”—R. Bell, Origins of Islam in Christian Environment, London: Macmillan & Co., 1926 It’s not very widely known how deeply rooted in Roman Catholicism is the religion of Islam. Recognizing the nature of this relationship will help considerably in understanding the present religious war. When Mohammad (c570-632) founded Islam, Christianity ruled an evildoing world under full authority of the mark of Cain, the double-cross now separated into sword and +.

Coin depicting Emperor Phocas bearing sword, crowned with cross It was the Emperor Constantine (c 285-337) who had given the mark to the Christian bishops, and Augustine of Hippo (354-420) who developed the theological system under which the mark would be enforced by the masters of the Roman Church until today and perhaps beyond. During the lives of the apostles and for several generations afterward, the Christian churches had lived and preached straight from the original Greek Scriptures the gospel of a loving and accessible God, all in a joyous spirit of reconciliation and intellectual freedom. With Augustine, who in his own words “hated Greek” and “was not competent to read and understand” the language, came an approach to Scripture that suffered from his insensitivity to it. Important meanings were overlooked or denied, resulting in a majestic, Saturnian indifference to mankind, the promotion of priestcraft, and a nasty impatience with any opinion that disagreed with his own. According to Farrar, “Augustine was the first and ablest asserter of the principle which led to Albigensian crusades, Spanish armadas, Netherlands butcheries, St. Bartholomew massacres, the accursed infamies of the Inquisition, the vile espionage, the hideous large fires of Seville and Smithfield, the racks, the gallows, the thumbscrews, and the subterranean torture-chambers used by churchly torturers.” [Frederic Farrar, Lives of the Fathers] On the strength of Augustinian dynamics, the Emperor Justinian (“the Lawgiver,” 483-565) declared the Bishop of Rome first among the bishops of the other great churches. When the bishops of Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem disputed Rome’s primacy, the Emperor Phocas, in 606, decreed from Constantinople that the Bishop of Rome was sovereign over the other churches. For this significant economic and spiritual boon, and for his zealous enforcement of Roman Catholicism with the gallows, the rack, and systematic mutilation, Phocas was commemorated by Pope Boniface III with an obelisk which stands in the Roman Forum to this day. Phocas was easily overthrown in 610 by Heraclius, who loved war so much that in his spare time he would go to the empty circus alone and kill lions with his bare hands – imitating the first labor of his mythological namesake, Hercules. Under the Emperor Heraclius, Arabia was little more than a desert dominated by fierce Ishmaelite tribesmen, who herded camels and caravaned incense and other commodities between Yemen and the Fertile Crescent. Heraclius’ wars with Persia stimulated commerce, making Arabs prosperous as mercenaries and suppliers. The Arabs’ open boast that they were entitled to recover by fraud or force the Abrahamic inheritance of which Ishmael had been unjustly deprived led Pliny to conclude that “Arabs were equally addicted to theft and merchandise.” (That Arabs failed to realize that the Abrahamic inheritance consists solely of Jesus Christ reflects an indifference to Scripture among Christian missionaries, particularly to the epistles of Paul.) Mohammad, the Prophet of Islam, was born about 570 in a sanctuary for itinerant merchants

called Mecca, to the Quraysh tribe – quraysh meaning “shark.” Mecca was home to the Qa’aba, a black meteorite believed to be of divine origin. Idols were lodged with the Qa’aba by the hundreds from pagan denominations all over the middle east. Before Mohammad was nine, he lost both parents and came under the protection of his uncle Abu-Talib. Arabia was steeped in spiritism. Most tribes had their visionaries called “kahins”(probably from the Hebrew kohen, “priest”). Covering themselves with their cloaks, the kahins would release the voices of familiar spirits called companions or friends or seers. The spirits would manifest in the form of a vague mumbling or of short, staccato rhymed phrases, with repeated oaths which called freely on the names of the morning and evening stars, plants and animals – all delivered in a breathless, rapturous style which made a great impression on audiences. Highly respected, the kahins were consulted as oracles and advisers in both public and private matters. Although Mohammad was not a kahin, his contemporaries couldn’t help noticing the many traits he had in common with them – frequent emotional attacks, and a tendency to see, hear and feel things beyond ordinary capacity. Nor did Mohammad aspire to become a kahin. He wanted more out of life than telling fortunes and interpreting dreams. Abu-Talib took Mohammad on a caravan to Syria, where they met a Catholic monk named Bahira. Bahira discerned from a birthmark below Mohammad’s shoulder that the 12-year-old lad bore the Seal of Prophethood. He cautioned Abu-Talib to guard his nephew’s life. Mohammad was sent back to Mecca, where he became a shepherd. In his twenties, Mohammad began working for a rich and savvy businesswoman by the name of Khadija ibn Yshaq. Khadija was twice his age and had been twice married. She is said to have studied in a convent and contributed much money to the bishop of Rome. Khadija’s business was equipping caravans that traveled into Syria and brought back Byzantine merchandise for sale on the Mecca market. Caravaning in Khadija’s service kept Mohammad in contact with Bahira and his Catholic brethren. In about 596, Khadija proposed marriage to Mohammad through an intermediary. Mohammad consented and began devoting himself exclusively to developing himself as a prophet in Mecca. Of course, what resulted were the visitation of the angel Gabriel in 610, Allah’s commandment that Mohammad preach Islam in 613, and the gradual compilation of the centerpiece of Muslim religion, the Koran. Scholars have identified numerous sources from which the Koran is drawn, among them Zoroastrianism, Hanifism, Judaism; Yemenite, Abyssinian, Ghassanite, and Syrian Christianity; Sabaism (a combination of Judaism, Manicheism, and old disfigured Babylonian heathenism); and native ancient and contemporary Arabian beliefs and practices, such as polygamy and slavery (which Mohammad incorporated into Islam). The Koran is sourced in all these disciplines not because Mohammad was conversant in them but because of the way the Koran evolved. It began with the retention in memory by Mohammad’s hearers, each of whom understood in the context of his peculiar religious conditioning. Hearers who could write traced the Prophet’s sayings in ancient characters on palm leaves, tanned hides, or dry bones. After Mohammad’s death in 632, all these fragments were collected by Zaid ibn Thabit, Mohammed’s disciple, and placed in a single volume believed miraculous. The chapters were then arranged according to their length and without regard to historical sequence. Muslims preach the Koran as an “improvement” on Christianity. The Koran improves on Christianity, indeed, the only Christianity known to Zaid and Mohammad and the Syrian monk Bahira and another of his teachers, a Catholic cousin of Khadija’s, a man named Waraqah. The

Koran gloriously supersedes and improves upon the Christianity of the Prophet’s Christian mentors, enemies, and auditors because they knew only seventh-century Roman Catholicism, which Edward Gibbon wrote had insensibly relapsed into a semblance of Paganism: their public and private vows were addressed to the relics and images that disgraced the temples of the East: the throne of the Almighty was darkened by a cloud of martyrs, and saints, and angels, the objects of popular veneration; and heretics flourished in the fruitful soil of Arabia, investing the Virgin Mary with the name and honours of a goddess. Yes, the fiercely monotheistic Koran is a refreshing improvement upon the Christianity that had placed the Scriptures under the same forbidding keys that had anciently locked the Babylonian Mysteries to all but the licensed priests. The true Christian “faith once delivered to the saints,” however, is not improved upon by Mohammad, the Koran, or Islam because there’s no evidence that the Prophet ever came into contact with that faith, the apostolic faith held, for example, by the Hebrew Bereans in Paul’s day “who received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.” [Acts 17:10-11] In a word, there were no “scriptures” to search. How, then, could Mohammad or his mentors or transcribers or disciples ever have heard the true Gospel, ever have known a true Christian, ever have seen Christianity being practiced? Considering the Prophet’s intense spiritual awareness, if he had experienced authentic Christianity – which promises a lot more than eternally-satisfied appetites in a perfumed paradise – he might even have preached it! Since it doesn’t contemplate the Bible, Mohammad’s miraculous Koran doesn’t judge the Bible. What it does judge is “another Gospel, another Jesus” (as the apostle Paul put it), a tradition which excluded from common access “all scripture given by inspiration of God, and profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: that the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.”[2 Timothy 3:16] The Koran judges seventh-century Roman Catholicism and its socio-economic effects on Ishmaelite non-believers. It judges the bearer of the mark of Cain, finds guilt, and calls for the judgment to be executed — to Cain’s immense pleasure, for he is divinely ordained to avenge sevenfold all who would attempt to rid the earth of him. And that has been the history of Islam: executing judgment upon the mark of Cain, successfully at times but mostly under a stultifying backlash of sevenfold vengeance. A conspiracy theorist could handily conclude from Islamic history that Rome had carefully nurtured Mohammad to create a religious discipline that solidified his fellow Ishmaelites into a systematized form of evildoing which the papacy could employ or punish according to its needs in solidifying world order under itself. Wise military strategy always prefers a malleable enemy to a disobedient friend. Students of biblical prophecy also see a symbiosis, especially regarding Rome’s need to punish the disobedient Byzantine churches after 606. “Mohammad is that star that fell from the profession of Christianity,” wrote Calvinist scholar Thomas Goodwin. Unto him came an innumerable company of Arabs – who in Rev. 9 are called ‘locusts’ for their multitudes... Wringing Arabia, Egypt, Assyria, Armenia, and much of Asia the Less from out of the hands of the Eastern Empire – and extending their dominion further over Persia, East India and a great part of Africa and Spain – they became almost as great an empire as that of Rome had been. Biblical scholars have also carefully stipulated that Islam’s evildoing nevertheless performs God’s

will. Consider Puritan scholar James Durham: Mohammad is against all idols and images, and allegeth himself to be specially commissioned against idol-worship. And it may be that God purposed him indeed to scourge that sin thus to make him the more instrumental in pursuing that sin, partly more to convince and shame Christians addicted to it. [Durham, Complete Commentary upon the Book of Revelation, 1657] 10. Rome's use of Islam as a weapon Rome masterfully deployed Islam to increase the material wealth of the papacy at the expense of the Byzantine churches. An emergency created by Islamic leaders served as a magnet to draw out of Europe its able-bodied men, who entrusted their properties to Rome so that they might risk their own lives recovering eastern Christianity from the Infidel, and rescuing holy relics – while providing safety for pilgrims adoring them – in Palestine. We’re talking, of course, about the Crusades. An interesting way of looking at the Crusades begins with the Great Schism of 1054, conditions precedent to which are explained by The Russian Orthodox Cathedral of St. John the Baptist, Washington, D.C,, as follows: While Rome was strengthening its juridical hold over the Spanish and Gallic churches in the 9th century, an authoritative Spanish priest named Isadore compiled a collection of ecclesiastical acts later known as the ‘Pseudo-Isidorian Decretals.' The collection consists of three parts. In the first part, there are fifty Apostolic Canons and sixty decretals of the Roman popes. Of these sixty decretals, two are partly falsified, while fifty-eight are altogether spurious. In the second part, among other spurious material, there is the spurious donation of the city of Rome by the Emperor Constantine to the Roman Pope Silvester. The collection was first published only at the end of the 16th century, and then scholars proved without difficulty the spuriousness of the documents that were in it. At the present time, even Catholic scholars do not recognize their authenticity. But at that time, the collection served as an authoritative basis for the development of ecclesiastical relations in the West, inasmuch as it was accepted on faith, and in the course of all the Middle Ages enjoyed the authority of authenticity. The popes began categorically to cite the decretals of the collection in substantiation of their rights to supremacy in the whole Church. Pope Nicholas I (858876) began first to cite the Pseudo-Isidorian Decretals, since he first formulated sharply and decisively the idea of papal omnipotence in the Church. But the East, naturally, did not recognize this omnipotence. Nicholas I tried to subordinate the East to himself in a swoop. But he did not succeed in this. As a consequence of this failure, the Church schism appeared: for the first time in the ninth century, and definitively in 1054. The Crusades began in the years following the Great Schism in response to a plea from Alexios I Komnenos, the Byzantine emperor, to Pope Urban II for aid in retrieving nearly all of Asia Minor, which the Seljuq Turks had taken by conquest.

Urban addressing the Council of Clermont At the Council of Clermont in 1095, Urban – “by the permission of God chief bishop and prelate over the whole world” – informed subjects that Your brethren who live in the east are in urgent need of your help, and you must hasten to give them the aid which has often been promised them. For, as the most of you have heard, the Turks and Arabs have attacked them... They have occupied more and more of the lands of those Christians, and have overcome them in seven battles. They have killed and captured many, and have destroyed the churches and devastated the empire. If you permit them to continue thus for awhile with impunity, the faithful of God will be much more widely attacked by them. On this account I, or rather the Lord, beseech you as Christ's heralds to publish this everywhere and to persuade all people of whatever rank, foot-soldiers and knights, poor and rich, to carry aid promptly to those Christians and to destroy that vile race from the lands of our friends. Christ commands it. [Where Christ commands Christians to destroy any race will not be found in the Scriptures.] All who die by the way, whether by land or by sea, or in battle against the pagans, shall have immediate remission of sins. This I grant them through the power of God with which I am invested. O what a disgrace if such a despised and base race, which worships demons, should conquer a people which has the faith of omnipotent God and is made glorious with the name of Christ! To become a crusader, a man underwent a specific ceremony. First, with his wife’s consent, he sought out a priest, bishop or higher cleric and swore to carry out an armed pilgrimage in support of the Holy Places. He then usually received a cloth cross – the mark, signifying sevenfold vengeance – which he could place on his clothes to signify his new status. The novice crusader then placed his property and human resources under the protection of the Church. He risked excommunication if he didn’t leave within a certain period of time. Just 23 years into Urban’s dispatch, Hugh de Payen and Godfroi de St. Omer founded the Knights Templar, which were extolled by the papacy’s leading propagandist, Bernard of Clairvaux, as “the epitome and apotheosis of Christian values.” Within a few years, Pope Honorius II ordained the Templars the most highly esteemed religious order in Christendom, and called upon noblemen in England, Scotland, Flanders, Spain, and Portugal to shower them with donations of land and money. Honorius’ successor, Innocent II, then placed the Templars under an exclusive vow of papal obedience, effectively bringing their vast resources under the immediate disposal of the Holy See.

Convinced they were building a new world, the Templars called each other frère maçon, later anglicized to “freemason.” With the definitive negotiating advantage made possible by their immense wealth, combined with a diligent communications network spanning east and west, the Templars evolved the monetized debt banking system on which the world still operates today. Early in their two-century sojourn in the east, the Templars appear to have been indoctrinated into a Byzantine “Jesus” more like the Koran’s than the Bible’s, more like Cain than Abel. After their cataclysmic absorption into the papacy in 1307 [see Chapter 6, Rulers of Evil], the documents of the Templars underwent extensive judicial probity. It was discovered that the Knights had been initiated into a secret branch of eastern Christianity who called themselves Johannites because their apostolic succession flowed not from Peter but from John. The Johannites believed that Jesus may have done miracles “since God can do things incomprehensible to human intelligence,” but he could not possibly have risen from the dead. Therefore, his claims to oneness with God made him “nothing, a false prophet and of no value.” [Michelet, Procès du Templiers] To the Johannites, the One High God was wholly removed from humanity, like the God of Cain (“from thy face I shall be hid”). Therefore, lordship over the material world belonged to the evil brother of Jesus, Satanael – a name and position that powerfully suggests a Cain-Saturn overlay. Since Satanael alone could enrich mankind, Templar wisdom consisted in neglecting Jesus, the false prophet of no value, and acquiring as much learning from the lord of the material world as time and effort allowed. This learning, which has reached the contemporary world through the medium of Augustinian theology, we call secular humanism. When the Templars were abolished in 1312, their Grand Master Jacques de Molay established a broad network of lodges in which Satanaellian wisdom formed the basis of social order, while the Pope secretly transferred the extensive Templar properties to the Knights Hospitaller of St. John. De Molay’s network would blossom in the Enlightenment into modern Freemasonry, which would eventually become the “secret bridge” across which the Superior Generals of the Society of Jesus would anonymously transmit orders to Protestant leaders directing them to social processes (such as the American Revolution) ultimately serving the Roman Pontiff. An often overlooked mission of the Knights Templar was to repair the Great Schism of 1054 by subjugating the eastern churches to Roman sovereignty. This was begun in 1204, when the Crusaders – an army organized to fight Islam – plundered Constantinople and forced the eastern Orthodox communities to accept a doctrine known as “Uniatism.” Defined as “the union of Orthodox Christian communities with Rome through acknowledgment of the Pope’s claim to universal primacy,” Uniatism was made official policy by Pope Innocent III at the Fourth Lateran Council in 1215, and confirmed in a Bull of 1254 by Innocent IV. “Far from being a method of union,” writes Rev. George Dragas, professor at Holy Cross Greek Orthodox School of Theology in Brookline, MA, “Uniatism is simply a method of Orthodox capitulation to papal supremacy.” According to Dragas, Uniatism was entrusted to the Jesuits as part of their responsibility for the Congregation for the Eastern Church. In 1577, the Society established the College of Saint Athanasios in Rome to train Orthodox priests for free. “But the Jesuits used the College primarily,” writes Dragas, “as a political arm to impose Uniatism.” Violence was usually involved, especially upon the Orthodox Slavs in Poland, Lithuania, and the Ukraine by the royal family of the Sigismunds, a supreme arm of the Jesuits. Dragas tells us that “Uniatism continued its divisive work in the East during the 17th and 18th centuries, [and] was expanded in Capatho-Russia in 1646, Slovakia (1649), Transylvania (1698) and the Balkans (Albania, Bulgaria, Serbia and Greece), as well as Constantinople and the Near East – not only among the Orthodox, but also among the Armenians, Copts, Ethiopians, Syro-Jacobites and Malabar Indians.”

The “destructive and unethical principle of ‘divide and conquer’” remains Jesuit policy toward Eastern Orthodox Christianity today, explains Rev. Dragas. “The question the Orthodox must ask is, How can Orthodox and Roman Catholics engage in meaningful and constructive dialogue on the basis of common faith and tradition when the Vatican does not abandon Uniate intrusion?” Americans know little or nothing of Uniate politics. So what if George Tenet, formerly White House aide in the profoundly Jesuited Bill Clinton administration and now Director of the CIA is a graduate of Georgetown University and a Uniate member of the Greek Orthodox Church? Here’s what. Mr. Tenet has been endowed since 1997 with billions of American taxpayers’ money to fight the clandestine side of what September 11, 2001 made an officially-declared “Crusade ”in the land of Muslims and non-Uniate Christians. As a Jesuit-educated head of a secret army founded by a fellow Catholic who was honored by Hitler’s Pope, Pius XII, for his secret service to the Church, how could Mr. Tenet even dream of going against the will of the Superior General of the Society of Jesus, whose mission is to subjugate non-Uniate Christians and Muslims alike to the same papal jurisdiction, the same rulership of evil, that binds Protestant Americans? Just as the Knights Templar would have had no business in Muslim and Orthodox regions had the infidels not moved against Christians in 1089, the CIA would have had no business there a thousand years later had not the elder Bush’s clients moved Kuwait against Iraq, initializing the resentment that has resulted in the Al-Qaeda’s hatred for America, of which September 11th has become emblematic.

Osama bin Laden appears in every way to be a nurtured enemy, a human being designed, in the way Adolf Hitler was designed by the hand of Jesuits, to precipitate definitive societal and economic change. In addition to the reams of paper documenting how the bin Laden family’s extensive fortunes intertwine with those of the Bushes, we have that remarkable story in Le Figaro last October 31st. Here was eyewitness “authorized source” testimony that, although Osama was wanted by the United States for terrorism since the attacks against the American embassies of Kenya and Tanzania in 1998, a high CIA official visited him in a Dubai hospital over a 10-day period between July 4th and 14th, eight weeks before the attack on America, and even “bragged in front of some friends that he had visited the billionaire Saudi” before being recalled to Washington on the 15th. Viewed outside the context of religious war, this appears to be a typical example of political ineptness – like the CIA’s failure to see September 11th taking shape from its constant stream of intelligence data from inside Al-Qaeda and surveillance of its far-flung operatives; like President Bush's refusal to investigate this; like the absence of a news-hawk to prosecute its fishiness. However, viewed in the context of religious war, in which all the decision-makers’ understanding is bound by obedience to a transcendent rulership of evil striving for a newly-ordered world economy and social system, it shows consummate responsibility. 11. Is Cain his brother's keeper? In 1995, the Society of Jesus held its 34th International Congress (GC34) in Rome. A series of decrees issued, No. 3 of which stated: “Working together with our colleagues, every Jesuit in his ministry can and should promote justice [by] participating in social mobilization for the creation of a more just social order.” Decree 5 niched the mobilization in the Arab world: The relations of the Society of Jesus with Muslims go back to St. Ignatius himself, from the time he discerned his vocation at Manresa as the call to go to Jerusalem and remain there among

Muslims. The experience of Jesuits who have approached Muslims with preparation, knowledge, and respect has often shown that a fruitful dialogue is indeed possible. However, in some places Jesuits have found it difficult to dialogue with Muslims, especially in states based on Islamic law. In such situations they feel apprehensive about possible violations of religious rights and even of basic human rights. To face such situations, Jesuits need great faith, courage, and the support of the rest of the Society. GC34 then heard a homily delivered by Superior General Peter-Hans Kolvenbach, who is a noted Arabic scholar, having labored among the Arab peoples, principally in Beirut, Lebanon, for two decades before his unanimous first-ballot election to Superior General in 1983. General Kolvenbach made it clear that the Jesuit mission to Muslims is not merely to have “fruitful dialogue” with them.

“Why try to delude ourselves?” the General asked bluntly. “It is conversion or the absence of conversion which is the deciding factor for the living-out of this congregation, for the future of all that this general congregation has elaborated, clarified, and decided.” Conversion, exactly as the mission of the original Crusades had been, the conversion of all Muslims and non-Roman Christians to papal obedience. This is indeed the deciding factor, the great end of religious war: conversion, by all necessary means including the sacrifice of human flesh and liberty and property, the conversion of Rome's enemies into its rank and file. Human energies can be seduced into any cause, any operation. With sufficient psychological conditioning, any youngster can be trained to spray his schoolmates with hot bullets or strap on a bomb and detonate inside a disco or synagogue. Psychological conditioning is the peculiar genius of the Jesuits.

The beginning of Jesuit mind-transformation is the Spiritual Exercises, a month-long reformatting of the imagination developed by Ignatius Loyola during his lengthy, painful, and often hallucinatory recovery from cannon wounds at about the time Martin Luther was translating the Bible into German. Loyola’s Spiritual Exercises manual is a religious bestseller, having been reprinted more than 4,500 times. The Exercises take anywhere from three to four weeks to experience, usually at a retreat and always under the supervision of a Jesuit spiritual director. Self-mortification is induced, with vivid imaginings of “hell in all its breadth and depth.” The Blessed Virgin Mary is asked to “get me grace from her Son.” And in the end the mind is reduced to a void craving substance from above. “Take, Lord, and receive all my liberty, my memory, my intellect, and all my will – all that I have

and possess...” The Exercises purify the psyche and dedicate it to conquering “the evil one” in the company of an army whose commander is the Lord Jesus Christ. As we saw earlier in this essay, the Lord Jesus of the Exercises is subtly different from that of the Bible. Loyola’s Constitutions provide that the Superior General must be “obeyed and reverenced” always as the one who holds His place. Five hundred times the Constitutions repeat that one must see Jesus Christ in the person of the Superior General. When all’s said and done, the Spiritual Exercises are about obedience to a man posing as Christ. German historian Manfred Barthel has observed that Jesuit obedience exceeds mere obedience of the will. Obedience of the will is exemplified by one’s obeying against one’s better judgment – “I shouldn’t do this, but I must because I’ve been ordered.” Jesuit obedience is the work of a consciousness altered by spiritual exercise, a perfect suspension of disbelief which Dr. Barthel calls “obedience of the understanding.” This is an obedience that stems from Section 365.13 of the Exercises, which states, “We must hold fast to the following principle: What seems to me white, I will believe black if the hierarchical Church so defines.” In other words, if the Superior General says white is black, one does not overcome one’s inclination to believe white is white, one actually perceives white as black. What I believe is irrelevant; all that matters is THAT I believe. Obedience of the understanding is the basis of the fantastic postmodern affirmation “You have your truth, I have mine.” Francisco Xavier, who was personally trained in the Exercises by Loyola himself, clarified obedience of the understanding for all time with his famous unintended irony, “I would not even believe in the Gospels were the Holy Church to forbid it.” We’ve all seen obedience of the understanding in action. It happens when a child accepts abuse delivered as punishment because it’s for his own good. It happens when you know you’ve got to have what that salesman is selling. It happens when the recipient of a death threat suffers a sudden lapse of memory before the grand jury. It happens when an officer lies confidently under oath. It happens when a candidate for Supreme Court bears his Senate examination with impeccable political correctness. I’ve seen Jesuits practicing obedience of the understanding spontaneously, and it is awesome to behold. I once casually asked two elderly Jesuits what would happen if a brother should disagree with General Kolvenbach. Instantly, both men bellowed “Oh!”, threw their hands toward the ceiling, spun around, and nearly collapsed on the floor. They stood bent and limp, heads shaking in befuddlement. It was as if I had punched them both with cattle prods. Their answer never went beyond that head-shaking “Oh!” God only knows the price those gentlemen paid to achieve that understanding. Beginning September 11th, this scene came to mind frequently as I watched how quickly the communications gatekeepers established that the planes had been hijacked by suicidal Muslim fundamentalists on orders from Osama bin Laden as a declaration of war against the United States. How obediently that presumption is clung to, despite good evidence to the contrary! It’s as though the media have involuntarily spun away — “Oh!”—from considering such dissident evidence as * that Osama denies responsibility, * that CIA officials who were so intimate with Osama prior to the attack have maintained “incomprehensible silence,” * that technology exists for the planes to have been driven to their fate by existing Northrop-Grumman robotics, *

that none of the passenger lists released by the airlines contained Arabic names, * that at least one of the World Trade towers seems to have collapsed from an intricate system of internally controlled demolition, * the incriminating passport that magically appeared, and so on. The understanding of the media seems to have been co-opted by some divinity, a divinity that is perhaps revealed in the encyclical Inter mirifica issued in 1964 by Pope Paul VI, who was educated by Jesuits and is regarded by historians as a profoundly “Jesuited” pope. Inter mirifica stated that “It is the Church’s birthright to use and own the press, the cinema, radio, television and others of a like nature.” This encyclical assured Catholic media proprietors that they “have the power to direct mankind along a good path or an evil path by the information they impart and the pressure they exert. It will be for them to regulate the economic, political, and artistic values in a way that will not conflict with the common good.” The encyclical seems to have been taken seriously in America. Of the many dozens of radio talk show hosts interviewing me during the month following the HarperCollins publication of Rulers of Evil, most were professing Catholics. Only two were Jews, and several had come out of Catholicism either to embrace Scriptures or to pursue some alternative spirituality. Significantly, the Catholic hosts did not advocate Catholicism, nor did they criticize me or my book as being “anti-Catholic.” In most cases, had I not asked their religious profession, they would have seemed as non-sectarian as the media generally do. Yet there exists an obedience of the understanding between them and the masters of their faith. September 11th demonstrated that obedience more holistically than any event in recent memory. Even before Inter mirifica, the world was making macrocosmic Spiritual Exercises. The traumas following the sinking of the Lusitania, Krystallnacht, Pearl Harbor, Hiroshima & Nagasaki, John F. Kennedy’s and the other famous American assassinations, Viet Nam, Waco, and Oklahoma City have all produced political development pursuant to the Vatican agenda. They mortified America’s imagination, and perhaps the world’s, with searing nightmares of “hell in all its breadth and depth,” and in the end reformatted susceptible minds into crippled, numbed, empty vessels craving direction from the Jesus of Roman Catholicism – “Take, Lord, and receive all my liberty, my memory, my intellect, and all my will – all that I have and possess...” Isn’t that what the frantic singing of God Bless America was all about? Catastrophizing the imagination can be said to be Jesuit modus operandi. Jose Anchieta, the first Jesuit Provincial of Brazil, wrote, “There is no better way of preaching than with the sword and the rod of iron.” [J.C.H. Aveling, The Jesuits, page 154] In India and Ceylon, St. Francis Xavier encouraged children in the early stages of conversion to wreck pagan shrines, smash idols, and break Buddhist holy relics. To the Governor of Goa, he proposed military expeditions against Hindu and Moslem princes, even a raid on Arabia to destroy Mecca. [Aveling, ibid] Alessandro Valignano, a 16th-century Jesuit Visitor-General to the Far East, complained that Jesuit missions could not function properly without the sort of penal jurisdiction they enjoyed over reservations in India and South America. The hardest of all peoples to manage, Valignano wrote, were the Japanese: “The Japanese converts will not suffer being slapped or beaten, nor imprisonment, nor any similar methods used as with other Asiatic Christians. They will not obey unless they fear death. [Aveling, ibid] Hiroshima & Nagasaki seared the Japanese mind with death as nothing had ever done before. “Little Boy,” as the first nuclear bomb deployed against humanity was called by its American developers, answered the Jesuits’ need for violent preaching. It wrecked sacred shrines,

immolated holy relics, and formatted the Japanese understanding to obey an infinitely more dynamic Sun-God than the Emperor Hirohito.

I’m haunted by what its Japanese victims named the bomb. Far more sensibly than “Little Boy,” they called it genshi bakudan, which means “Original Child Bomb.” Original Child Bomb! Get it? Anyone familiar with the book of Genesis knows exactly who the original child is. He’s the first child born of human flesh – Cain. Genshi bakudan will forever remind those who speak Japanese that Hiroshima and Nagasaki were the work of Cain, who is divinely ordained to subdue and destroy, according to need, any soul who follows Babylonian moral guidance or dares rebel against him. There’s no doubt that Hiroshima created popular consent to, even demand for the United Nations – whose insignia, as we’ve seen, bears the mark of Cain. Few world leaders and even fewer constituents cared that the UN’s basic intentions were formalized at San Francisco on June 26, 1945. But when American armed forces nuked Hiroshima 40 days later, there went up an immediate hue and cry for world peace through unity. The following October 24th, the United Nations Charter was ratified, and on January 10, 1946, the first Security Council met in London. And for the next forty years, every nation’s vital decisions were made to the frightening obbligato of that awful picture of the ascendant mushroom cloud.

Several more critical elements are missing from the world’s knowledge of the relationship of Hiroshima to Cain and Rome. Awareness of these elements can help us better understand how September 11, 2001 was merely the continuation of an ancient pattern. First, one of the most diligent advocates of nuking Hiroshima was the official Vicar of the American Armed Forces during World War II, Francis Cardinal Spellman, Archbishop of New York and a pupil and special patron of the Jesuits.

For the billions in American funds he raised for the Vatican, Spellman was dubbed “Monsignor Precious” by Pope Pius XI. Indeed, it was Spellman’s generosity toward Pius that facilitated the election of his intimate friend Eugenio Pacelli to the papacy as Pius XII. Friends and critics alike recognized Spellman as “The American Pope.” Second, on day the bomb was dropped on Hiroshima, August 6, 1945, President Harry S. Truman’s Secretary of War John J. McCloy, the best-informed government official on the development of nuclear weaponry against Japan, just happened be present, of all places, in Rome.

In private life, John McCloy was a Rockefeller lawyer. Third, the head of the Jesuit mission in Hiroshima, Pedro Arrupe, was a medical doctor residing just 4 miles from the bomb’s epicenter. Although the bomb and its scorching 40-mph winds shattered mission house windows, Dr. Arrupe and his community of Jesuits were able to venture out within 30 minutes into the suburbs – the first medical team to start up in the stricken city.

“Without any doubt,” wrote the late Jesuit professor Malachi Martin, “their efforts at aiding the stricken were instrumental in the postwar success of the Jesuits in Japan.” Made a hero by Hiroshima, Arrupe was elected 28th Superior General of the Society of Jesus at the 31st General Congregation of the Society in 1965. GC31 vowed to “foster the collaboration of the laity in our own apostolic works.” One of the Society’s apostolic works was prosecuting Cardinal Spellman’s imperative to defend against communist rebels the Catholic tyranny he had enthroned in French Indochina during the Eisenhower administration. (His Eminence would make headlines blessing the guns used against the Viet Cong.) General Arrupe’s lay collaborators in America were the men who controlled the nation. President Lyndon Johnson was a graduate of Georgetown (the university owned and operated by the Jesuits under a mandate to develop thought harmonious with the Holy See’s). Secretary of Defense Robert S. McNamara was a Roman Catholic, as was Gen. William C. Westmoreland, Chief of the Military Assistance Command in Vietnam

These key collaborators brought us the legacy of Vietnam war, which to many signifies needless death, wasted resources, moral degeneracy, the evolution in the homeland of systematized drug addiction, the decimation of the family, and so many more evils — all in pursuit of a goal never reached: inoculating Vietnam against communism. It is probable that the Kolvenbach generalate will do for the Middle East what the Arrupe generalate did for Southeast Asia. And the exorbitant price once again, as always, will be paid by those Americans who seek moral guidance from Cain. I cannot say, as some have said, that General Kolvenbach positively commanded the events of September 11th. Until I see convincing evidence, I will go no further than to say that the General was more responsible for September 11th than, say, James Earl Ray was for the murder of Martin Luther King. James planned no killing, shot no one, thought he was in Memphis for something totally unrelated to either murder or Dr. King. Yet his guilty plea withstood all his later attempts to withdraw it because in fact he did participate in King’s assassination by – Casuistry Alert! – making himself available to be framed for it. I would venture that the General, on the other hand, cooperated in September 11th by first knowing – with his definitive overview of international wealth, secret international policymakers, and his innumerable plugins to every nations’ secret army – that the events would occur, and then by studiously neglecting to exert his power to prevent them from occurring. The Pope had called for “a more just sharing in the world’s resources, and a new economic and political order that will better serve the human community at a national and international level.” The world had been unwilling to heed His Holiness. So the General went to work. One becomes Jesuit General by mastering the Sun-Tzuan strategy of arranging circumstances so that one’s enemies react to given stimuli in the manner one desires without their being commanded; so that they act in their own self-interest without realizing that they are performing to another’s agenda. I believe that General Kolvenbach merely determined where to nudge and where to withhold, and obedience of the understanding – in whatever national intelligence agency or combination thereof – took care of the rest. In September 11th and its aftermath we bear witness to the fluidics of evildoing. Consider just a handful of General Kolvenbach’s current lay collaborators in America. * His chief tribute collector is the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Charles Rossotti, who is a Roman Catholic graduate of Georgetown University. * His chief published clandestine operative is CIA Director George Tenet, a Uniate member of the Greek Orthodox Church and another graduate of Georgetown, who has thus far received some $10 billion to spend toward converting the Middle East to the new economic, social, and spiritual order scheduled by the papacy. * His chief protector of Americans at home is another Roman Catholic, former Governor Tom

Ridge, who opened his 911-inspired Homeland Security agency with a startoff budget of $8.3 billion. * His chief warrior against the awful spectre of biological terrorism is former Governor Tommy Thompson of Wisconsin, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, with an annual budget of nearly $500 billion, some of which is funding an intense campaign tocombat bioterrorism, which involves expanding the ability of medical officials to criminalize resisters to vaccinations and to quarantines and subject their property to forfeiture laws. Former Gov. Thompson recently donated his official papers (against the wishes of the University of Wisconsin) to Marquette University, another Catholic institution owned and operated by the Jesuits. Marquette is so pleased with Thompson's donation that funds have been raised to construct a new education department named after Thompson, whose two daughters are Marquette graduates. * Not the least of the General’s lay collaborators is former New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani, a charismatic Catholic who was created no less a hero by September 11th than was Pedro Arrupe by Hiroshima . * For good measure, the General enjoys the lay collaboration of Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle and Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Joseph Biden, and I leave it to other students of the ROE to complete the list. It’s highly unlikely that anyone named above would depart one inch from the General’s agenda of draining credulous American labor to fund the world’s conversion to Roman religious values. So how can our Religious War be sanely lived with? Know this. The Roman Pontiff and his General are no more to be condemned for September 11th than is Yahweh, God of the Bible. After all, Yahweh, too, had power and authority to prevent the catastrophe. But He admitted it into existence. He did it so that the world might see His will with utmost clarity. And here is His will: That the world recognize Yahweh as infinitely greater, more merciful, more just, more gracious, more loving, more accessible, and more fatherly than either Allah or the God of Rome, America, New York, the World Trade Center, Pennsylvania, and the Pentagon. Yahweh’s will is readily cognizable by receiving Scripture from the Holy Spirit. But the world has insulated itself from the Spirit in order to participate in the fascinations of evildoing. This results in cyclical September 11ths enthusiastically plotted and administered with impunity by the rulers of evil. The irony is that Scripture, so conscientiously ignored, promises exactly this consequence. So what can a Christian do? Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world. And the world passeth away, and the lust thereof: but he that doeth the will of God abideth for ever. [1John 2:15 ff] Mourning the loss of a “once-Christian America,” blaming impaired rights and liberties on demonized persons and factions, and yearning to “take our country back” confess a love of the world and the pride of life. These attitudes minimize the effectiveness of prayer to Yahweh; they promote energies that serve Cain. Reflect on how diligently non-Catholic Christian leaders like Robertson and Falwell supported the Bush candidacy, which in victory has erected a more Catholic administration than even Ronald Reagan’s. (Similarly, during the 1920s Jesuit General Vladimir Ledochowski built a powerful Catholic and Jewish criminal underground on the energy of a Protestant determination to destroy the largely Catholic and Jewish alcoholic spirits industry. And there will always be the example of Laurence Richey’s employment of Protestant rebellion to establish a government over which Catholics could and did rise to supremacy.)

The logical effect of loving not the world is being thankful for a rulership of evil. Yahweh answered Cain’s question “Am I my brother’s keeper?” by founding world order and making the first murderer its lord. In the most literal sense, Cain really does keep his brother. (By Cain I mean the Roman Pontiff and all the ecclesiastical and temporal power flowing from his mark. By his brother I mean the typical Christian described by the apostles, any “saint,” any believer who bears the fruit of the Holy Spirit – love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, and temperance.) Cain keeps his brother not in the sense of imprisonment but in the sense of safeguarding him by policing the world for evildoers who might do him harm. But there are some among even the saints whom Cain will imprison. These are the ones that fall, often by pious mistake, into innocuous forms of evildoing— uncorrected lapses in displaying the 9-faceted fruit of the Spirit, for example. The mildest of these offenders, Mr. & Ms. America, Cain keeps liable for tribute, in a state of peaceful, voluntary penal servitude. In times when the saints grow epidemically apostate, such as these days, Cain waxes great. Many of the saints, in their ignorance, grovel at Cain’s feet. Others, out of love for the world, protest Cain and plot the impossible task of overthrowing his tyranny. A few so love the world that they seek the only begotten son of Yah, and read by His light, and discover their ignorance, confess it, repent, and commit to reconciliation. Reconciliation eliminates the need for Cain to restrict. It dissolves anger and balances the body chemistry. Whether the saint does well or ill, Cain remains his brother’s keeper – in one case a firewall of protection, in the other, a chastening rod of iron. This has been a very comforting awareness for me. And ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars: see that ye be not troubled: for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet. For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be famines, and pestilences, and earthquakes, in divers places. All these are the beginning of sorrows. Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name's sake. And then shall many be offended, and shall betray one another, and shall hate one another. And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many. And because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold. But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved. —Matthew 24:6 Part 1 Part 2 Part 3 Part 4 =========================================================== Posted August 2003 Dialogues, Vol. 3, No. 1

Reflection and amplification on RULERS OF EVIL through correspondence between ROEders and the author DAVID WROTE: I want to thank you for the courage you demonstrated in writing this book! Your work has assisted me with the struggle of just being angry and indignant at the governmental and economic powers-that-be. Over the past several years I've read numerous Noam Chomsky books and others; these writers got me looking past my naive and propagandized perspectives. And then my faith in Jesus Christ and the admonition to "love not the world" became enriched through your text. Especially chapters 24 and 25. ...And then I looked more closely at one of my diplomas—from Princeton Seminary in NJ: the emblem on the bottom shows a Holy Bible illuminated by a sun with numerous rays (Ra fromEgypt?). During my studies in 1984-87, German liberalism was espoused and expected of all students learning theology and biblical studies. I did not succumb! Look forward to your next book. TUPPER WROTE: The rays would more probably mean Mithras, who was notoriously confused with the Lord Jesus Christ during the first century of the Church. I think the Savior of the American churches today is Mithras, the great and secret Roman imperial god, and it was probably Mithras who encouraged the American patriots to put England to the sword. David Ulansey has done some interesting astrological scholarship that links Mithras directly to the historical Cain, although I doubt Ulansey is aware of the fact. (He hasn't responded to my inquiries.) Thanks for your interest. My next book should be announced soon on my website. B. B. WROTE: ...I would reference you to the EVIL that is presented in your book Rulers of Evil. TUPPER WROTE: If you've read the final chapter of Rulers of Evil, you probably know that my position regarding the evils of rulers is one not of condemnation but of reconciliation. The surest way to incur the unnecessary and inconvenient wrath of rulers is to judge them, and this is perfectly in accord with scripture: "Judge not, and ye shall not be judged: condemn not, and ye shall not be condemned." This does not mean that I look the other way, or do nothing while evildoers prosper. As a Christian, I must be "about my Father's business," and that doesn't include judging worldly political systems. I know the federal system was chartered, orchestrated, and brought to life by protestant zealots unwittingly doing the muscle work of the Society of Jesus so that an English-speaking protestant nation could be established on a constitution that permitted Roman Catholics

to reach the highest political offices. What these people do with their government is none of my business. What Rome did with its government was none of the apostle Paul's business, yet Paul valued his Roman citizenship because it protected his method of worshipping his God. For ten years I lived as a fugitive. It was perfect freedom without any civil rights. I didn't vote, didn't sue, wasn't sued, had no licenses from any government but my own, which is Christ. Driving cars unregistered in any state, I was stopped no less than six times and courteously released because the paperwork I presented them, although issued by no state, satisfied their needs. Just as scripture commands, I submitted, but my submission gave them no right of action against me because (a) none of my documentation showed jurisdictional nexus to a state with which they had compacted, (b) I had violated no common law or ordinance of man, and (c) I had done nothing personally offensive to the inquiring authority. I was also able to enjoy the benefits of the banking system, although I know federal reserve banking is fundamentally evil. The Lord says He will make of our enemies "a footstool." I take that to mean that the malevolent energies of evildoers can be, and are supposed to be, used by us for good purposes. This is impossible if we condemn governments rather than submit to them. So, regarding the treason issue, I'm satisfied to let the charges of treason come from within the government, which ain't gonna happen. Treason charged from outside the government is a vanity because it lacks standing. There are so many proofs that the USA is an organic part of the Babylon of biblical prophecy (many will be found in Rulers of Evil) that little time has to be spent any longer trying to convince people of the fact. What's important for me is to obey the biblical imperative and "Come out of her, my people." Coming out of Babylon means looking on her wickedness sadly, because she's been judged by the only power that can (and will soon) destroy her. Coming out of a system as complex as USA is harder than kicking an addiction. Indeed, USA is an addiction, and part of the addiction is being angry over her evils. I see many people addicted to anger. Rulers know the people love to learn of scandals and bigtime ripoffs because it keeps them angry, and reactive. Rome built the USA on patriotic anger; she built the Confederacy on the same thing, and the reconstructed 14th-amendment constitution, too. She's in the process of building the ultimate fascistic state on that same anger, and we can choose to be the unpaid construction workers by fomenting condemnation, or we can lay ourselves off. Fortunately, the laws have always made it possible for non-playing citizens to be unmolested. This is the fundamental treasure of American citizenship. On my site is an article "15 Brienner Strasse," which shows the origins of Hitler's government as a movement to stop communism. Hitler's first major support came from the Vatican emissary to Bavaria, E. Pacelli, who later became Pope Pius XII. The Vatican, led by its militant wing the Society of Jesus, has historically opposed communism—although the Society of Jesus is essentially, by the dictates of its own Constitutions, a communist organism. USA's most vigorously anti-communist prelate, Cardinal Spellman, was a Jesuit and a bedfellow of J. Edgar Hoover, a zealous anti-communist 32nd-degree Freemason. The condition of the USA today was brought about by dozens of trillions of dollars and hundreds of thousands of lives raised by men like Spellman and Hoover from Americans committed to the eradication of communism. All this wealth and tragedy now culminates in the politics of Homeland Security, which augurs to be as repressive and as deceptive as bolshevik Russia ever was. And we have the people's reaction to the summons to fight communism in a spirit of judgmentalism and condemnation to thank for it. So I'm a little wary of calls to oppose anything. Fomenting opposition is the grand strategy of rulers of evildoers. They capitalize on the natural spirit of rebellion in all of us, and we forget (or

never learn) that in God's mind rebellion is "as the sin of witchcraft." They organize the rebels into useful armies that go out and fetch what the rulers need. They did it with the congregationalists and deists of the thirteen colonies, they did it with my forebears in the deep south, they did it with the Klan and the Negroes and the communists and the anti-communists and the liberals and conservatives and workers and managers and pro-lifers and pro-choice and gays and straights and feminists and male-chauvinists, and the polarization goes on and on making, as Christ put it, "merchandise of you." It's not that I oppose opponents of communism. I wish them well, because communism is an ugly system. But anti-communism can be just as ugly. So I wish good fortune to communists at the hands of oppressive anti-communists. The only thing I can be certain of is that I am not working for either party, except to let them know that the best government is one they have yet to try, the Lord Jesus Christ. THE PHELPS ATTACK August 9, 2002 Dear Friends: . . . .From now on I will refer to F. Tupper Saussy as a Jesuit Coadjutor until he confronts me and refutes my charges. This email will go everywhere including Spectrum. Sincerely in Faith, Eric Jon Phelps August 10, 2002 Mr. Phelps, If you would kindly address your charges, one by one, directly to me I would be happy to refute them. Sincerely, Tupper Saussy August 12, 2002 Dear Mr. Saussy, THANK YOU for contacting me. I would be happy to list the most important charges one by one. Please give me a day or two to assemble them. I sincerely hope that I am wrong. Sincerely in Faith, Brother Eric August 14, 2002 Dear Friends,

I will not be able to forward emails for about a week, as I am debating F. Tupper Saussy concerning some major errors, which I consider deliberate, in his book on the Society of Jesus titled Rulers of Evil. I have accused Mr. Saussy of being a Jesuit Temporal Coadjutor and thus will bring up my charges based upon quotations from his book. You will be privy to all the debates between us. We all should learn much - most of all me. Sincerely in Faith, Brother Eric August 19, 2002 Dear Mr. Saussy, I apologize for not beginning our exchange sooner. The attachment sets forth my Three General Charges causing me to conclude that you are a Jesuit Temporal Coadjutor. Please let me know if the terms of exchange are acceptable to you. If so, I shall begin with my first charge to which then you may respond. Thank you for your time and effort in this important matter. Sincerely in Faith, Brother Eric Augusts 20, 2002 Mr. Phelps, Your attachment cites various passages and ideas in my book with which you agree and disagree. But I am confused by the "Three General Charges" which have led you to declare me publicly, in advance of your having received my answer to said charges, a Jesuit Temporal Coadjutor under oath to the Superior General. This is a grave accusation, and should be attended by personal knowledge of relevant facts. I cannot possibly answer your charges until you list them one by one, as I requested in my letter to you of August 10. Please state them clearly. Don't oblige me, or any other reader, to guess what they are. And please recognize that a mere difference of opinion does not constitute a valid charge. I cannot consider this exchange a "debate" in any sense of the word. You seem to be accusing me of an act of conspiracy and deception against my brethren in the biblical Christian faith. I am responding to your accusation. This is not a debate. It is an inquisition, to which I am gladly submitting in order to give an answer to every man that asks a reason of the hope that is in me. Sincerely yours,

Tupper Saussy Dialogues, Vol. 3, No. 2 Reflection and amplification on RULERS OF EVIL through correspondence between ROEders and the author JOHN WROTE: Would you care to remark on the works of Dan Brown, The DaVinci Code? I wish that ROE was being sold and read as much as this book!!! TUPPER WROTE: I've found that DaVinci Code is a kind of Scholastic Aptitude Test for Rulers of Evil. (Formula: DVC is the SAT for ROE.) DVC gives the devil's side of reality, which is brilliant but ends in hell. ROE shows how God uses the devil, which is equally brilliant but ends in a choice of heaven or hell. While I was writing ROE, many confidants suggested the story might be better told as a novel. Maybe if I'd had Dan Brown's skills (DVC is the only book of his that I've read) I could have done that. But I was equipped to look just beneath the surface of things and make some sense out of what I saw, with the Bible as my final authority on questions of faith, morals, science, and history. So I just told it like it was -- and in matters of clandestine warfare, how it MOST LIKELY was (because clandestine warriors rarely leave the kind of evidence historians require). I wonder how DVC would have developed if the Bible had been Dan Brown's final authority? Anyway, DVC has stimulated interest in ROE, but in a word-of-mouth way. A guy says he read DVC, the ROEder says "Congratulations! Now you're ready for ROE!" Try that, and have a couple of ROEs in the trunk of your car. STEVE WROTE: At the end of your book, Rulers of Evil, you write that you [are] not one of those people who always has to be right. In that case, I should point out to you that your work is riddled with historical errors. The first error to catch my attention was your claim that Caesar was the first Pontifex Maximus. Accually, that office was ancient in his day having pre-existed Caesar in Rome for centuries. Such errors serve as a slap in the face to students of history, and tend to discredit your work to any one who is concerned with the truth. Caesar's deadly inovation was that he combined many offices: Tribune, Pontif, Dictator, and ignored the term limits. A stylistic desire to make things seem conspiritorial is no excuse for ignoring historic fact. I read your book with much pleasure, but it would have been better if you would have found an historian to edit it for factual content.

TUPPER WROTE: Thanks for taking the time to complain. You're right. I must have wanted to say that Julius was the first Roman emperor to ordain himself pontifex maximus, thereby assuming power of both church and state. That was the evidence I had at hand. I don't understand how my historical errors could be a slap in the face of history students, but rather an invitation for them to -- as you put it -- help edit the book for factual content. Your correction is a help in editing the book. Everybody profits from such help. I'm sorry you have concluded that my error indicates "a stylistic desire to make things conspiratorial." Your contribution that Julius combined many offices with his dictatorship and ignored term limits does not reduce, in fact even enhances, the conspiratoriality of papal rulership. I will publish your correction, and invite you to correct the other historical errors you find in the book. I'm not a professional historian with a reputation to defend. I was impelled to write the book because I could not find that any professional historian had ever looked into the subject. Indeed, it's my prayer that a professional historian will examine the commingling of papal and American politics not neglecting Rome's Babylonian heritage in light of history and biblical prophecy, and will do so with a thoroughness that makes my book completely useless. Until then, I must contend that ROE is the closest thing we have, flaws and all, to the true story. RALPH WROTE: I've inadvertently stumbled on a very well known tale which demonstrates how evil rules evil. But I've never quite looked at it in this light before. Recall the situation where Soloman was asked to determine the fate of a child claimed by two women. His decision was quite evil if you think about it. The evil woman didn't flinch. The good woman fled before it, willing to drop her claim rather than see the judgement carried out. We all assume that Soloman lied. He never intended to carry out that judgement. But a lie is evil, too. So, no matter how you view it, there was evil present. Yet evil came before Soloman, asking to be ruled. He couldn't rule it with good. He had to resort to evil to rule evil, knowing that good would rule good. This decision is the classic citation for a display of wisdom. I now realize that it was wise in ways I'd never considered, wise in ways that 99.99999% of those aware of it also fail to consider. Good can't rule evil. Only evil can. At least here and now. Realizing that simple fact is a pretty large step toward wisdom! And this simple tale, when presented to another in this manner, makes for a very quick way to get those who hold that "good can rule evil" to reconsider that position. They might argue that outcome went to good (and I agree) but the whole scene was simply evil ruling evil, good ruling itself by fleeing the evil. Try it. I think you'll be surprised at how quickly they'll get the point. It's almost a "sound-bite" explanation. Shorter, in fact, than what's written here. TUPPER WROTE: Beautiful insight. Can it be reduced to a mathematical formula? I'm studiously ignorant of mathmetics, as my attempt J=e/E indicates. How does one formulize Justice = lesser evil ÷

prospect of greater evil? It's a beginning that I know you can complete. Go to it, Doc!!!! RALPH WROTE: Lesser and greater evils. Not sure that I know how to quantify them. It's usually a matter of vantage, i.e. are you looking down, looking up or just looking to get gone. But I'm now beginning to wonder if you haven't hit on something by forcing me to attempt a quantification. It almost seems to me that the lesser evil rules the greater evil, while the greater good rules the lesser good. At first thought that seems irrational (mathematically), but it seems to fit. Studiously ignorant of math, eh? No musician can be such. You just need to count in base seven, not 10, then it would all become as intuitive as the music. You just don't have a metric mind. That's why even a piece of eight always made more sense to you than a disme. Mathematically, J (justice) must be < (less than) good and > (greaterthan) evil. Some tax protestor once talked me into getting an ICQ # so we might communicate more directly. At the end of a litany of complaints he posed, "Where do I find justice?" I replied, quite simply, "In heaven, stupid . . . or in hell." He actually sought something that just isn't available in this realm, and really can't be. Here, justice, even in the best sense of the term, can only slip and slide between good and evil, never quite touching either. The problem is that everyone thinks that justice (here) is supposed to be "good." And that's really a silly idea. Jesus clearly explained that. If sued for your shirt, offer your coat. Settle it, no matter the cost. "Justice" is a place you just don't want to go. ©2003 by Tupper Saussy Museum. All rights reserved. ============================================================ Dialogue Vol. I, No. 2 Reflection and amplification on RULERS OF EVIL through correspondence between ROEders and the author THE DOCTOR (FRIEND OF THE AUTHOR) WROTE: As a life-long, Jesuit-educated Catholic, I am astonished that you didn’t do your research re: the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception. It definitely does NOT mean that Mary was conceived by a virgin! Her conception was, most definitely, in the usual fashion. She was conceived, however, free from original sin.

That’s what’s immaculate about it. TUPPER WROTE: You’re absolutely right. My website does say that Pio Nono’s [Pope Pius IX’s] encyclical is “an unbiblical scenario which holds that Mary, like her Son, was conceived by a virgin.” My book states it only a little more conservatively, [as does the current website]. In ROE, I say that Ineffabilis Deus defines “Immaculate Conception, the extrascriptural doctrine that Mary, like Jesus, was conceived and remained free of sin.” [The current website quotes Pio Nono’s declaration that Mary was “preserved free from all stain of original sin in the first instant of her conception.” ] Did I do my research on Immaculate Conception? Let me say simply that I know, as you do, that IC is a relatively recent fabrication that until the 12th century the church fathers and doctors denied IC on the grounds that Mary was conceived normally, that is, in sin like the rest of us. (See Peter de Rosa, SJ, Vicars of Christ, p 237) . And I’m sure you know also that Pio Nono’s Marian theology, according to J.C.H. Aveling (a wonderful Jesuit biographer converted from Anglicanism to Catholicism by Jesuits), was developed almost exclusively by Jesuits. IC cannot stand under the Scriptural standard. By Scripture, normal human conception proves original sin, since Adam’s progeny were all conceived as a direct and proximate result of original sin. The only way one can be born free from original sin is to have a virgin mother inseminated by the Holy Spirit, and this occurred in no relationship but that between Mary and Jesus. There’s no escape from this if Scripture is the standard. Pio Nono’s proposition that Mary was, “in the first instant of her conception,.. preserved free from all stain of original sin,” has never pretended to be anything but impeccable Jesuitry. Nor can I see how such a broad statement bars the normal inference that Mary must have been therefore conceived by a virgin. More importantly, I know of nothing in Pio Nono’s definition that explains, as you do, that “Mary’s conception was, most definitely, in the usual fashion, but...free from original sin.” I would love to see Pio Nono’s, or the Magisterium’s, treatment of that point in light of Scripture. [The term Magisterium describes the teaching authority of the Roman Church.] THE DOCTOR WROTE: Ah, old friend, but scripture is not the standard; at least not the only one. Otherwise, how could non-Catholics believe in the validity of divorce except for “lewd behavior?” Or how could they hope to achieve salvation without “eating my flesh and drinking my blood?” Not just grape juice symbolizing something or other, but the real thing? Everything is possible with God Immaculate Conception, or blood under the appearances of wine. Of course, the best way to avoid nasty confrontation re dogma is to have no dogma. Well, we’re

all getting older, and it won’t be long until we learn the truth the hard way! I’ll keep you in my prayers. After all, there was St. Augustine! TUPPER WROTE: Scripture may not be the only standard and you’re right, before too long we’ll both know for sure. In the case of my book, however, Scripture is the only standard. You should know me well enough to know that I’m a standard man. Gold, silver, remember? My book puts forward the hypothesis, supported by a considerable amount of history and (since we are tracking covert warriors who try to leave no clues) construction from circumstance, that the very people who hooked America on a fluctuating, imprecise monetary standard are the same ones who began prying Christians away from the biblical standard even in the days of Peter, Paul, James, and John. All things are indeed possible with God. But He has graciously set limitations on the possibilities, lest he lose credibility with us. He very easily could but won’t, for example, play jokes on us such as get us to believe one thing that turns out to be the opposite of what is true. He tells us that Scripture is to be the standard. Why should I believe anyone who says otherwise? Wouldn’t I be like the guy who believes it when the Federal Reserve apologist declares that a precious metallic standard is out of date and impractical? Non-Catholics and Catholics alike can believe in the validity of divorce from the Scriptural standard, which only commands that we give honor to whom honor is due. Those whom the State has joined together God permits the State to put asunder (see Matthew 19:6). God’s part in the union is impossible for the State to destroy. This is a Scriptural truth that neither Catholic nor Protestant doctrine teaches. Non-Catholics and Catholics alike can know they have won salvation by the Scriptural standard that believing in Christ’s death and resurrection gives a sinner the status of perfection in the mind of God. Scripture has Jesus qualify what he meant by “eating my flesh and drinking my blood.” At John 6:63, after most of Christ’s audience have been turned off by his apparent invitation to drink his real blood and eat his real flesh, he explains to the disciples that he was speaking in spiritual terms in order to demonstrate who was being drawn to him by the Father. Last-supper symbolizing is not a Protestant construct; it is Scriptural. I think you’ll find Rulers of Evil interesting. With its foundation in Scripture, it presents the Jesuits in a very interesting, and I think in many ways admirable, light. I mean, what more can I give anybody than the American Revolution philosophically and strategically? No one can doubt their brilliance you are certainly an ornament to their teaching abilities. I’ve never met a Jesuit I didn’t admire, and I think my admiration for their skills in clandestine strategy shows again and again in the book. I think that a reasonable examination of Scripture indicates that the Roman Church Militant, led by the Jesuit General, comprise the divinely ordained universal rulership of evil. This is supported by a preponderance of history that I believe cannot responsibly be dismissed or laughed off. I’m happy to be in your prayers. You’re in mine, as well.

THE DOCTOR WROTE: It’s interesting how a reading of the same story leads to such different interpretations. My Bible says nothing about Jesus (who doesn’t play jokes on us!) saying, “Just kidding, guys,” when His disciples turned away from Him after the promise of the Eucharist. If there is individual, or personal, interpretation of Scripture (which is all there is!), how can there be standards? And if to accept Jesus as one’s savior equates with salvation, what difference does it make what you believe? Your reference to the precious metal standards is apt, because at the moment I am involved with the State’s Administrative Hearing Commission, on automatic appeal from their demand for back income taxes, and I am utilizing the gold/silver argument, as well as others. The responses I have gotten to interrogatories are almost laughably inept. Of course, forcing one’s opponent to make a fool of himself to justify his position only antagonizes him, and if one’s opponent also owns the court and the judges, losing is a foregone conclusion. My hope is that I might put some small seedling of truth in the minds of someone along the way, to germinate and fructify in the future. I mentioned, in one of my motions, that I could have greater respect for the Revenue Department if it simply stated its determination to seize my credit, law be damned. That would certainly clear the air, rather like Lucifer’s momentous NON SERVIAM. Cutting to the chase, as they would say today. Catholics, of course, don’t believe the state has anything to do with the Sacrament of Matrimony except to witness that it has taken place. Long before the state issues its puffery about divorce, the couple have already renounced the vows they made before God and man. Hey, but if you accept Jesus as your savior, it’s OK! Let’s sing a few hymns and sip some grape juice! Once Luther decided that he’d fare better with the German princes than the Pope, his “theology” was drawn up to fit the circumstances, and legitimize the whole thing. Personally, I think NON SERVIAM has a better ring to it, and is surely less tedious to read. Of course, the world still awaits the first example of anyone changing his mind as the result of an argument, and I don’t want to argue about religion, except that I prefer to see the Catholic position put forward by a Catholic! Thanks for your prayers; I need them and appreciate them. And I will remember you at Mass tomorrow and every day. TUPPER WROTE: This is my first experience discussing Scripture in writing with a Catholic! Not only a Catholic, but one who plays Mozart and preaches Article I Section 10 to State officials a man after my own heart! We could be Bereans, you know, those people whom the apostles regarded as “more noble” than the Thessalonians because “they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily whether those things were so” (Acts 17:11). Through discussion I think we could accomplish much that our Lord would find pleasing. In the last paragraph of my new book I wrote: I’m not the kind of person who has to be right. I let the evidence lead me. The evidence shaped my conclusions. The evidence wrote this book. To anyone who knows of countervailing evidence, evidence that might point me in a different direction, this is my request to see it. I’m not above repenting again, nor would I shrink from printing retractions. I want Reconciliation, and I want Truth. If St. Francis Xavier can say “I would not even believe in the Gospels were the Holy Church to forbid it,” with no less commitment I can say that I would not believe even the Bible

were Truth to forbid it. I would be honored to be shown my errors by your good self. Does our reading of the same story really lead to different interpretations? Or could it be that in the reading certain elements might have been overlooked which led to an insufficient paraphrase? I agree with you that different interpretations abolish a standard. Scripture agrees, “Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation” (2 Peter 1:20). Only one power can interpret Scripture, and that power is Scripture itself which is why Paul says that “all Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness” (II Timothy 3:16). I paraphrased the part in John 6:24-66 in which Jesus explained that his flesh-and-blood-eating speech was metaphoric only, a spiritual expression “to demonstrate who was being drawn to him by the Father,” as I put it. Was my paraphrase incorrect? Let Scripture adjudicate: This passage concerns dialogue that took place in Capernaum (24) and perhaps later in the synagogue (58). To the hordes of disciples that were attracted to him by the miracle of the loaves, Jesus declared himself Messiah, and warned them that his ministry was not about filling bellies with food (26). The disciples took issue, saying that God had sent their fathers manna from heaven (31). Jesus explained that now God was sending them “the true bread from heaven” (32). They cried “Evermore give us this bread!” But the bread Jesus was talking about was himself “I am the bread of life: he that comes to me shall never hunger, and he that believes on me shall never thirst” (35). Jesus reminded them that although they could see him, many would not believe him (36). Nevertheless, “all that my Father gives to me shall come to me and I will in no way cast him out” (37). To preempt any suspicion that God might deny salvation to some, Jesus explained: “This is the will of him that sent me, that every one which sees the Son and believes on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day” (40). Immediately (41) the Jews among this mass of early disciples began murmuring over Jesus’ metaphor of himself as the heavenly bread. They disbelieved him (42). Jesus told them not to murmur among themselves (43), and reiterated that nobody would believe him unless drawn to him by the Father (44). By this Jesus meant that only those who studied the Old Testament would understand who he was. “It is written,” he told them, “by the prophets ‘And they shall be all taught by God.’ Every man, therefore, who has heard and has learned from God, comes to me” (45). Then Jesus stated what I consider the Article I Section 10 of Scripture: “Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me has everlasting life” (47). Again, he called himself the bread “which cometh down from heaven, that a man may eat thereof, and not die” (50). He carried the metaphor to its logical extreme if he was bread, he must be eaten, and if eaten, his blood must also necessarily be drunk. The Jews, aware of the Torah’s prohibition on cannibalism and taking Jesus literally, were shocked. “How can this man give us his flesh to eat?” (52) Jesus explained that he was the “bread which came down from heaven: not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead: he that eats of this bread shall live forever” (58). Clearly, Jesus was not pretending to be substantive bread such as fell from heaven to the Israelites of Moses. He was declaring himself spiritual bread that will bring its consumer eternal life. This was the debut of the New Testament. Still perplexed by the cannibal issue, and unable to discern the spiritual meaning of what Jesus was saying, many of the disciples complained “This is a hard saying” (60). Then Jesus asked, “How shall you see the Son of man ascend up where he was before? It is the spirit that quickens, the flesh profits nothing: the words I speak to you, they are spirit, and they are life. But there are some of you that believe not...” and here (64) John parenthesized “For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray him.”

Jesus then continued, “This is why I told you that no man can come to me unless my Father has enabled him (65).” And so, because they had not heard and learned from God (cf.45), “many of his disciples from that time went back and walked no more with him” (66). Only twelve were left (67). The many disciples, ignoring the Old Testament prophecies of the one perfect man whose blood would cover the sins of every descendant of Adam, couldn’t get past the disgusting idea that Jesus was volunteering himself to become just another Canaanite sacrificial victim whose attributes were obtainable only through cannibalization. “The flesh profits nothing” went right over their heads. If the flesh profits nothing, how can transsubstantiation profit any? If Jesus had indeed created the sacrament of literal consumption of his flesh and blood, wouldn’t he have settled the matter beyond dispute by pricking his finger during the last supper and squeezing a drop of blood into the crucible? Not only did he neglect to do this, but also he let transsubstantiation divide those who walked with him from those who refused to be drawn by the Father to him. Crucial material here. Help me. How can one consider Christian any authority that requires its subjects to believe eating the real flesh and blood of Jesus would do them any good, if the Saviour himself is on record as specifically having said it wouldn’t? THE DOCTOR WROTE: Do you think Our Lord was referring to His own precious body when he referred to flesh? And cannibalism? How long would his corpse have lasted if everyone had to partake of it to gain eternal life? No, I partook of it this morning, and yesterday, and will tomorrow, and have daily for thirty-five or more years. It is a LIVING body, and gives life of a different order from ordinary food; it gives supernatural life. Well, enough. An advantage we have is that we don’t have to torture ourselves with “what is true?” We have the rock of Peter to decide these things for us. Christianity requires humility! TUPPER’S NOTE: Barred from continuing by my friend’s “Well, enough,” I can only reflect how foreign to me is a person who must “torture” himself with “what is true.” My most exciting pastime is sifting through evidence for what is true. My Catholic friend has well established himself in the courts as an advocate of the biblical “just weight and just measure.” For more than twenty years, in and out of court, he has protested modern money’s lack of substance and definition. Yet his “rock of Peter” the Magisterium has condoned unjust weights and measures for nearly 400 years, in accord with the great Jesuit casuist Antonio Escobar’s decision that “The giving of short weight is not to be reckoned as a sin when the official price for certain goods is so low that the merchant would be ruined thereby.“ (Universae theologiae moralis, 1652-66) Practical application: Our present monetary system began in the late 1960s, when Congress permitted the U.S Treasury and Federal Reserve banks to pay out copper tokens and paper scrip

in exchange for dollar notes. Congress legislated the giving of short weight in order to protect the merchant that is, the inflating federal economy from ruination. Obedience to Scripture would have held the federal economy accountable for printing more notes than there were dollars to redeem them in; Article I Section 10 of the Constitution would have enforced Scripture by making it impossible for State courts to enforce payment of debts in short weight. But Congress chose to reject Scripture and Article I Section 10, and to follow the rock of Peter. Congress and the rock relieved the federal economy of its legal and moral obligation to give full weight for its dollar notes. And today’s violent, decadent, diseased society, in my opinion, is its legacy. If my Catholic friend had truly let the “rock of Peter” decide the money issue for him, he would have accepted the Federal Reserve fiat as an article of faith. However, by choosing not to abide by the rock’s casuistry, my friend has made of himself. . . a Protestant, a Protestant no less articulate in the money than Luther was in the Scripture! My friend has examined the money with scientific passion. My prayer is that he’ll examine the rock of Peter in the same spirit. FROM NUMEROUS ROEDERS: Is there still hope for Constitutional money? TUPPER WROTE: I think the money issue will be happily resolved when people learn who the “conspirators” really are. Mistaken identity was the secret of the success of the Friends of Paper, and nothing really will be done until identities are clarified, and duties realized. That, really, is what Rulers of Evil is all about. GREGORY WROTE: I have understood the evil of the man who sits in the White House today. A question that came to mind as I read ROE — is Bill Clinton a Jesuit? I knew he was a graduate of Georgetown and then under the tutorship of Carroll Quigley, but I did not connect the dots that perhaps we have a full-blown Jesuit in the White House today. Is this an incorrect assumption? Concerning your chapter on the mark of Cain, I understand your reasoning, but I have some reservations about the first paragraph in Chap. 24. When I gather my thoughts, I will try to express my concerns. However, basically, I agree with your concept of faith that will be required to take us through these times of trouble. TUPPER WROTE: It’s irrelevant whether or not a person “is” a Jesuit. ROE’s position is that one becomes a Jesuit when one begins fulfilling their agenda, which is to keep the world ignorant of the Bible and therefore in need of a ministry of sin.

ROE led you to understand what Jesuits do; anyone who does Jesuit things, therefore, can be presumed to be one. Remember the provision in their Constitutions that permits the General to receive non-Catholics and women into the Society for special purposes. I know the first paragraph of Chapter 24 is hard to take. It took courage to write. But I’ll stand on its truth. Nevertheless, when your thoughts are gathered, fire away. I welcome your criticism. THOMAS WROTE: The following is a draft of what I would like to say to our State Senator at a prayer breakfast this coming Saturday. It is a far different version than one I would have given before ROE influence. I am not only speaking to the senator, but also to the audience. I welcome any criticism. Senator, I would like you to take a moment to think back over your past citizen meetings at churches and religious groups and then reflect on the character of those conversations. I would guess that most, if not all of them, were probably made up of complaints about the government and disparaging remarks about various elected officials. Before I proceed I want to make it clear that I am speaking for myself, not as a representative of Holy Trinity Church. I can understand why there are many complaints, there’s a lot to complain about. There’s gross immorality enacted into law, misapplication of laws, and the perception that government is taking away more and more of our liberties. However, this is not God’s perspective. When we Christians grumble about civil government, we forget that all the wrong and rebellious acts of evil governments are vanity, and that the Lord laughs at their efforts (Ps. 2:1-4). We forget the sovereignty of God. When we approach the problems in government in this way, we violate at least two commandments. The first is negative. It is a prohibition of a certain behavior. You shall not revile God, nor curse a ruler of your people (Exodus 22:28; cf. Acts 23:1-5). Our rulers are God’s representatives on earth. (Rom. 13:4). They are appointed by Him and owe their allegiance to Him (Dan. 4:17). Since God has placed them in that position for His glory and our blessing, we are not allowed to revile them. The second biblical requirement we violate by complaining is affirmative: it tells us what we must do instead of complaining. “Therefore I exhort first of all that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks be made for all men, for kings and all who are in authority, that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and reverence. For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth” (1 Tim. 2:1- 4). Paul applies this command to all men, but he lays special emphasis on coming before God with supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgiving for kings and all who are in authority. This is a far cry from offering complaints. Notice that this command is not conditioned upon the authorities being good authorities. It is absolute. We must give thanks for our leaders whether they are good or bad, wise or foolish. We must intercede for them before the throne of grace, asking God to give them wisdom in their office and, where necessary, to bring them to repentance. And when we hear our brethren complaining, we must exhort them also to pray.

Paul tells us at the end of this exhortation: that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and reverence. Praying in this way produces a specific result: peace for Christians. If we give thanks for and intercede on behalf of our rulers, they will leave us alone. But the peace is also broader than this. Living a peaceable and quiet life requires more than simply leaving the Christians alone. It requires peace and stability throughout the whole jurisdiction. It will not be possible for scattered households or communities to be at peace while the rest of the land is in chaos. The whole nation must have peace. Praying according to this verse brings that result. While this is the desirable end of the prayer, we should pray in this manner ultimately because it is pleasing to God: “For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth” (1 Tim. 2:3-4). Praying in this manner is one of the means by which God will accomplish His salvation. Praying for kings and all who are in authority facilitates the spread of the gospel. When the government is at peace, Christians are freer to move throughout the realm and preach the word. This passage in 1 Timothy reveals that the preaching of the gospel, and thus the salvation of men, is facilitated by giving thanks and making supplications, prayers, and intercessions for all men, for kings and all who are in authority. We see revealed in this passage one of the means by which God will establish his pre-ordained end. When we see the folly that goes on in civil government (and there is much to see), we must not forget that God is sovereign and that He has established His own King and given Him the nations for His inheritance and the ends of the earth for His possession (Ps. 2:6-8). When we adopt the world’s strategy complaining we forget that God has ordained civil governments to accomplish His purpose. If they are not accomplishing that purpose, He has given us the means, through prayer, to effect a change. Finally Senator, any authority you might have has been given to you from God. I’m sure you have an outstanding staff, connections for political contributions, etc. However, never forget that these are simply the means of you getting into office. If you treat them like the ends, you will in effect have created an idol. And any idol you create will be a jealous one and demand worship. I will be praying for you, Senator. I will be petitioning the Creator of Heaven and earth, the King of kings, the Lord of lords on your behalf. Please go and rule wisely. TUPPER WROTE: Your statement is beautiful. I only wonder whether it’s appropriate. It reaches the heights of a keynote speech. Maybe there would be some grumbling half way through. Maybe it can be more effectively used elsewhere, maybe even in print. You asked me what question I would pose to the Senator. Here’s my question: Senator, in your capacity as agent of Caesar, could you name the things that we, in our capacity as Christians, should not render unto Caesar? And then I’d sit down and keep my mouth shut. Let me know how the breakfast goes....

THOMAS WROTE: The prayer breakfast was smaller than I thought. We didn’t get 20 people, only about a dozen or so. The Senator came and could only stay for 1/2 hour. He gave a prepared speech on the following topics: 1. Abortion issue (he claims he’s pro-life) 2. Campaign Finance Reform (He wants it) 3. Bill in State legislature to have students recite portion of Declaration of Independence (He’s against it.) ...As he was leaving, I walked him out, told him I was sorry he couldn’t stay longer, but would he be so kind as to read my question and send me his answer at his convenience. Tupper, I wish you could have seen his face when he read it. He stopped walking and said “it's a very good question.” The way he smiled after he read the question, I would swear that he actually knew what I was talking about! His look wasn’t condescending or even confused, the look that passed between us was almost like one sharing an inside joke. Now, it is possible I am reading too much into this. Successful politicians (and this Senator has been in the legislature for two decades) are trained actors, they know what to say, how to say it and how to look when they say it. He might have reacted the way he thought I wanted him to react. The only way I will know is if/when I get a written response from his office. Which brings me to an idea. Remember in MOMS the letter writing to Attorney Generals, Department of Treasury, etc. requesting if the state still follows Article I, Section 10 of the U.S. Constitution? I remember doing that and getting the same type of response as you showed in MOMS — where the state would acknowledge that Article I Section 10 is binding, and if I have any specific legal questions, I should contact a lawyer. I now intend to start a collection. I am going to write (not e-mail, I want hard copies) my state legislators with the question on what Christians should not render to Caesar. I’m going to spread it out over time so not to give an impression that some sort of organized campaign is going on and see what responses I get. I want to compare local with state answers, state with federal answers, long-term politicians with short-term politician answers. I want to see if our agents of Caesar know what their role is. TUPPER WROTE: Great idea on submitting the question to officials. Keep me posted on your response. I think it’s wise not to email it around. For Christianity to succeed, it must be millions acting individually as Truth impels them. They only give an appearance of organization. Anything more formal than that is the doctrine of the Nicolaitanes, which Jesus hates. THOMAS WROTE: I’d like to share with you a quote by Martin Luther on government: The reasonable question has been put whether it is better to have a good but imprudent ruler

or a prudent but personally bad one. Moses here certainly calls for both: a good and a prudent ruler. However, if both qualifications cannot be had, good is better than a good one who is not prudent, because a good one rules nothing but is only ruled and only by the worst of people Even though a prudent but personally bad ruler may harm the good people, he nevertheless rules the evil ones at the same time; and this is more necessary and proper for the world, since the world is nothing but a mass of evil people. TUPPER WROTE: This Luther passage is totally new to me, yet one could make a good argument that it probably inspired me to write ROE. We have here an object lesson in the phenomenon I put to you in an earlier letter “For Christianity to succeed, it must be millions acting individually as Truth impels them. They only give an appearance of organization.” THOMAS WROTE: If I work from the premise that Satan is used to shepherd evil through civil government and its authority is divinely appointed and sealed with the Mark of Cain Does it have limited authority or does it have carte blanche? I know Cain is limited by God in what he can and can’t do, but is it not true that the agents of Cain exceed their legitimate authority? (This would explain the killing of martyrs without just cause.) TUPPER WROTE: Cain (i.e., his agents) does sometimes step over the line, but not nearly as often as most people think. When he does, God deals with him directly, as with Nebuchadnezzar. In my own tax case, many (including myself for awhile) felt Cain had overstepped. Not so. Cain has carte blanche with everyone who pleads to his jurisdiction. I pled the Fifth (among other points) on sworn applications (1040 returns) meant for resident aliens to use in requesting the benefit of deductions and allowances. Offending Cain inside his circle, I created my own martyrdom. Luther did, too. The popes could have tortured and killed him, but that would not have been politically expedient. Far wiser to grace him with the privilege of carrying on while Jesuits conquered his system from within.

===================================================== Dialogue Vol. I, No. 1 Reflection and amplification on RULERS OF EVIL through correspondence between ROEders and the author THOMAS WROTE: I do hope that www.TupperSaussy.com will be updated frequently with some sort of e-newsletter that will contain your thoughts about the present state of affairs in light of the revelations in RULERS OF EVIL. I’ve read the book. I’m now on my second reading. The history is exceedingly interesting, but the most fascinating portion is your analysis of the “Mark of Cain,” especially your conclusion that Cain sacrificed Abel. Question: What theological writings would you recommend? Especially from the reformers (Luther, Calvin, etc.) in regards to their thoughts on Rome and the Jesuits. Question: I am still a bit flustered after reading your book. What are we, as Christians, to do? Being informed is one thing, but knowledge without action is unfaithfulness. Do you suggest that we just go along with the ride? Knowing when to act and how to act has always been troubling to me. TUPPER WROTE: Be warned that my hypothesis on the mark of Cain is pretty eccentric. It usually creates blank faces among scholarly theologians. I don’t know why. There seems to be a rule that novel inferences from Scripture border on heresy. It’s a pretty good rule I must say, as so many novel inferences really are heretical schemes designed to serve a ministry’s agenda. I’ve just returned from three weeks of photographing temples in Thailand, Laos, and Cambodia. The influence of Cain was very powerful there. The high Buddhist monks occupy a throne which, in many temples, is marked with the Annu signature in gold. Gold is the color the Bible associates with Babylon, the first state. Tradition associates gold and yellow with Cain, the first statesman. Abraham Slender in Shakespeare’s Merry Wives of Windsor has “a yellow beard, a Cain-coloured beard.”

Every Buddhist temple in Laos is guarded by naga, the serpent with the mouth of a dog. In ancient Babylonian icons, the dog often was a metaphor for Cain, from whose name is derived from the Latin canis, "dog." Nagas seem to say that the serpent's brilliant wisdom is preached through Cain's mouth, a notion corroborated by the Bible. Another persistent image in southeast Asian buddhism is the golden serpent, a pair or more of which guard every temple. Wouldn’t Cain have deified the serpent for providing the divine knowledge of good and evil which enabled him to command slaves to mine the earth’s gold for him? I would love someday to brainstorm the historicity of Cain and the Mark with reasonable theologians who are trained in the deceptions normally employed by secular political power. Sadly, such persons are hard to find. Back in the mid-eighties former president Nixon’s chief counsel Charles Colson stated that, of all visitors to the White House, by far the most politically naive were the Christian pastors. Alas! so many still are, and their flocks as well. I sense that it’s our task to educate as many as are willing to confess —as you and I have done— that they’ve been deceived.

Detail from the throne of a Laotian Buddhist temple. The golden double-cross in Babylonian means “heaven,” and is the name of Annu. Annu is the chief god who empowered the lesser god Marduk to rule evildoers, in the same way Yahweh empowered Cain to move among peoples of the earth with impunity. As ROEders know, the name of Annu forms the vast pavement of St. Peter's Piazza, the epicenter being occupied by the Obelisk of Caligula. So few Christians are aware that not to be deceived is an explicit commandment from Christ: “Be

not deceived”( I Corinthians 6:9, and two other places, emphasizing the principle). Christ even suggests that the inner desire not to be deceived is a strong indication that one truly is an elect of God (Matthew 24:24). Pastoral Business wants to hold a symposium someday and share our discoveries and insights with all who seek undeception. You seem inclined to research. You certainly can write. Stay in touch with us. I’m not aware of any well-formed writings of Luther and Calvin on the Jesuits. Luther died in 1546, just 6 years after the Society of Jesus was ordained and Calvin died in 1564. More interesting to me than the Protestants are Christians who simply kept to the Scriptures without protesting Rome, without even recognizing Rome as a member of the Body of Christ. They loved neighbor as self, honored the king no matter how corrupt, agreed with their adversaries without doing evil, governed themselves and their families keenly and prosperously with Christ their Sovereign Lord. They were apparently all over the place, as they are today, and I want to be in touch with them. Another resource I’ve found immensely valuable in understanding the Roman Catholic Church is The Berean Call, written by Dave Hunt and Tom McMahon. These fine scholars are doing extraordinary work in undeception. Also Biblical Discernment Ministries appears to pull no punches coming from a solid foundation in Scripture. CHARLES WROTE: Not trying to be the heavy, but during the 60’s I spent all of my spare time studying the state of our government and its activities to bring us to the brink of WWIII (which seemed to me to be on-going without us realizing it was happening). Watching the destruction of Joe McCarthy was painful, I thought then from available evidence that he was right. Now, over 40 years later, we can finally see that he was right, that our government was responsible for the tyrannies imposed on most of the free world after WWII. It is frustrating to me to have to wait so long for the truth to out, when anyone who cared could have seen the truth while it was happening. I was one of the few who tried my best to alert those around me to what was going on, but was drowned out by the overwhelming attacks by the popular media and their puppets in law, journalism and Hollywood. Enough, I just wanted to share this most interesting story with you in case you didn't see it otherwise. TUPPER REPLIED: McCarthy did his entire star turn within seven years, start to finish. He was not only a Roman Catholic—as devout as they come—but also he was trained by the Jesuits of Marquette University. We shall never know the mouth-to-ear communications between him and his Jesuit superiors, but the sudden rise of anti-communistic rhetoric attending his career, curtailed by its perplexingly sudden suppression, suggests the application of controls beyond the normal popular ability to perceive. I strongly suspect that the Jesuits made communist polity an issue beginning with the generalate of Vladimir Ledòchowski, who had both the authority and the claim on resources to direct the

Bolshevik Revolution from his castle in Zizers, Switzerland. Of course, there is a record of Jesuits being anti-communist (they had to be in order to support Hitler as faithfully as Ledòchowski commanded them to), and when people argue that to me, I say that the Society must then be anti-Jesuit, since it has practiced pure communism since 1540. No Jesuit can own property, he must obey the will of superiors in every case, and all his earnings go directly to the Society for distribution according to common need, etc. We need the energy of young scholars to search out the connection between McCarthy and his Jesuit mentors before, during, and after Marquette. How else could he, uniquely, obtain the intelligence to speak with such certainty about communist ties? Why would anyone bandy such allegations about unless he was assured that resources would become available in the near future to mature the allegations into lawful prosecutions? And once it was discovered that such resources were being curtailed, for whatever reason, who but someone aware of the futility of arguing with the Black Papacy would saturate himself with alcohol in hopes of making the situation sufferable? McCarthy took his place among the many thousands of doomed Jesuits who had outlived their usefulness to the Society. (You might wish to review, in ROE, Lorenzo Ricci’s degradation of the European missions in preparation of the American Revolution.) The Society’s agenda, we can see now with our hindsight, was to educate the public in the ugly ways of communism using even uglier teachers— “Have you no decency, Senator?”— the public expressing their dislike for the teachers by embracing what the teachers opposed. Your being “drowned out by the overwhelming attacks by the popular media and their puppets in law, journalism and Hollywood” may have been the calculated, Sun-Tzuan result of Joe McCarthy’s having been chosen by the Society to be the stereotypical ugly teacher. The reason I call your attention to this is that these same processes are at work today. Aware of this fact, those of us who care about the truth can perhaps go about our business more discreetly and more effectively than we used to. MARK WROTE: How connected are the “jews” to the Jesuits? I have heard rather closely, but maybe you can comment. TUPPER REPLIED: As for Jesuits and Jews (I use the proper noun to err on the side of political correctness), the main principle is that neither subscribes to the Jesus of Scripture, and both are subservient to Rome. The declaration “We have no king but Caesar” is observably as binding today as it was when the priests and the pharisees uttered it during Christ’s trial. To those who insist that Jews run the world, I say okay, but only by the permission and appointment of Rome. According to Manfred Barthel, whose book on the Jesuits was submitted to several Jesuits for approval, “the Order has always had a reputation as a refuge for Jewish converts.” The second General of the Order, Diego Laynez, made clear in his autobiography that his family were prominent “New Christians,” as Jewish converts in Spain and Portugal were called.

By the end of the 17th century, the Jesuits were suffering accusations of defiling Christian doctrine and morality with their “rabbinical-pharisaical mentality” and “subtle Talmudic incantations.” In 1814, however, the Jesuits turned anti-semitic. I believe this was in order to mask their collusion with the money power operated by the House of Rothschild, “guardian of the Vatican Treasury.” Still, behind the convenient facade of antisemitism, as Bismarck wrote (quoting Kaiser Wilhelm I), “the Jews and the Jesuits always flock together.” I think after reading RULERS OF EVIL you’ll understand how the Jesuits can simultaneously embrace, discredit, frame, and annihilate the Jews. The Jesuits are, after all, an army run by a General who can do anything to anyone under Rome’s jurisdiction in order to preserve the Roman State, which is evidently the New World Order. (February 11, 2000) EDWARD WROTE: I was browsing through a big Portuguese dictionary today, writing a fax to a close Portuguese friend who is not comfortable in English or French, and ran across a word I had never heard before. The word is Jesuitof bia, and means “hatred of Jesuits.” The corresponding personal noun is Jesuit fobo, meaning “a hater of Jesuits.” I thought this might be of interest to you in your ongoing fascination with the Jesuits. I checked my best French dictionaries afterwards, and found no corresponding words in French. [The Portuguese monarchy expelled the Jesuits from the country in 1759, when the country was being run by the Marquis de Pombal. This expulsion, and Pombal’s influence on neighboring countries, led to the expulsion of the sect from France (in 1764), from Spain (in 1767), and to the (temporary) dissolution of the order in 1773.] TUPPER REPLIED: Many thanks for Jesuitof bia! I guess many of the Portuguese had reason to fear them. I’m familiar with Pombal’s attack on the Society. ROE considers it in some detail. I theorize that Pombal, who was a Freemason, was unwittingly acting upon instructions from Superior General Lorenzo Ricci, whom I posit at the top of the masonic heap. Interestingly, when thousands of Jesuits were brought by ships to the shores of the Papal States, the Pope—having consulted with General Ricci —refused to receive them. Indeed, I theorize that Ricci orchestrated the entire demise of the Order so that Protestant colonists in America might not see that the Revolution they were about to fight was a Catholic affair. Radical? Wild? Paranoid? Maybe, but the facts are extraordinarily interesting when viewed in this possibility. Again, thanks for the new word. (February 11, 2000)

RICHARD WROTE: Thought I’d better pass this on to you so you can deal with it. Mr. J is a frequent contributor to the FreeRepublic web site and may in fact be one of the operations people there. Richard: I have read the entire website about Tupper Saussy and I’d have to be a bit less enthusiastic. He relates a tale in great detail about the placing of the Goddess of Freedom (Persephone) atop the Capital Bldg. Much of the information in this tale is made up of whole cloth and I have an ancestor whose handwritten daily journal I have transcribed and he describes the “new” statue just placed on the Capital Bldg. (the same one in Saussy’s tale) but this was about 20 years before the date attributed to it by Saussy. I’d be a bit circumspect, I think. TUPPER REPLIED: Richard, if Mr. J’s ancestor saw the statue on the Capitol 20 years before the date I attributed to it, he was indeed a visionary. My “story” is not whole cloth, but is based on official publications, the Congressional Record, and unpublished documents personally inspected by me in the Office of the Architect of the Capitol. If Mr. J discovers my dates are right, I wonder if he would be a bit more enthusiastic about my book. MR. J WROTE: Hello, all. I’m incorrect. My ancestor referred in an entry in his journal to the beauty of the capitol building and the new colossal Goddess statue he had just seen (this was Dec. 21, 1834). By going back to the transcription of his journal and scavenging through other sections of it, I can now see that he was most probably referring to the statue “Goddess of Peace” which at that time was in the rotunda of the building along with the statue of Mars. My error was misconstruing his description of the capital building as having viewed the Freedom statue which is colossal I would say. I apologize for my error of incorrect inference, and indeed here is a link with a bit more interesting background (in case you haven’t seen it) on the statue in question and its sculptor: http://viva.lib.virginia.edu/etext/fourmill/statue.html Certainly I did not mean to cause any anxious moments to anyone, though I’m sure Tupper had done sufficient research to not feel at all concerned. Thank you for bringing the correct “sequence of statues” to my attention. There was no intention to impinge any research anyone may have done but as I think we all know there are some real charlatans running around (some in elective office, to boot) and when I spot something I think is an error, I have an automatic protection mechanism that goes into operation. TUPPER REPLIED: Thank you for the self-correction, Mr. J. The only concern I felt, since we’re not acquainted, was that another patriot type was trying to lead truth-seekers astray with information I knew to be false. That always concerns me. I’m happy you cleared that up. Yes, the site http://viva.lib.virginia.edu/etext/fourmill/statue.html contains some interesting information on

Freedom. But ROE contains all that plus very much more. For example, Virginia.edu does not integrate the statue’s development with dates, causes, personages, and events in the War of Southern Secession, as my book does. Now that you know that ROE is not in error —at least on this point —I hope you’ll consult a copy in your quest for more details. And please don’t neglect to bring anything in it you suspect of being in error to my attention. Like you, I only want truth. (February 12, 2000) RICHARD WROTE: I’ve been asked to speak for Alan Keyes’ position on the 2nd Amendment at a rally here down at the Varsity parking deck in March. If you’ve heard Keyes speak on that subject, you KNOW what I’m going to say. About the only thing that bothers me about Keyes is that he IS a Roman Catholic. Tupper, any thoughts here? TUPPER REPLIED: The fact that Keyes is a Catholic wouldn’t bother me—even if I were a voter. The system is Catholic, so it would probably function a lot better with more Catholics operating it. We can’t say “So and So is Catholic, we can’t put him in office.” It doesn’t work that way. Catholicism is divided into liberals and conservatives, just like every other human institution. There are liberal and conservative Jesuits. Pat Buchanan is a conservative Jesuit and by far the most attractive presidential candidate I ever saw. I wouldn’t worry about who’s part of a Jesuit cabal. When you get down to it, American Government is a Jesuit cabal. No matter how freely the people participate in it through the elective franchise, the will of one autocratic person, the Bishop of Rome’s Clandestine General, is going to be done. And the bottom line on his will is the survival of the Church of Rome as God’s rulers of evil. (February 13, 2000) KEN WROTE: On page 212, you say that the term “Queen of Heaven” is mentioned 5 times in Jeremiah 44. I can only find 4 mentions. Am I missing something? TUPPER REPLIED: I wrote “The term ‘Queen of Heaven’ appears nowhere else in the Old and New Testaments but at Jeremiah 44, and there exactly five times.” I should have written “The term ‘Queen of Heaven’ appears nowhere else in the Old and New

Testaments but in the book of Jeremiah, and there exactly five times (once in chapter 7, four times in chapter 44).” Thank you for spotting the error, and please consider this a standing invitation to do so elsewhere in the book. [This error has been corrected in the HarperCollins first edition.] THOMAS WROTE: Having read through your book a THIRD time, I now am (respectfully, of course) demanding a sequel. What was the Jesuit influence on the writing of the United States Constitution? What was the Jesuit influence pertaining to the War of 1812? Was there major Jesuit influence in America during the late 1800s (I know there was major flux of immigrants who were Roman Catholic and the start of the Catholic School System). Was there major influence of Jesuit control during the crucial years of 1913-1920? What role (if any)did the Eastern Orthodox Church play? Did they have a Jesuit equivilant? Tupper, there are two books that have had a major effect upon my thinking and you are the author of both of them. (The Bible has a continuous influence upon my thinking as opposed to a challenge to my thinking.) The Miracle On Main Street inspired me to read the Constitution (Federal and State), learn more about the money system, analyse financial patterns and more. Now, ROE has me tracing the history of Secret Societies. My previous belief was that Secret Societies infiltrated the Roman Catholic church. It now appears that in actuality it is all in reverse! It is Rome, via the Jesuits, that is controlling the Masons, the Skull & Bones, the Knights of Malta, the Grotto, etc. I am now in continuous research using ROE as a foundation... TUPPER REPLIED: I’m glad ROE has broadened your concerns about where worldly power lies. The Constitution had to protect Bible-reading Christians from Rome— that’s the condition God placed on the Mark of Cain. Cain has to identify himself, can rule anyone who submits to his moral guidance, and can only use force against those who want to trash him. He’s free to deceive souls into his jurisdiction, but that’s okay because Jesus always shepherds His flock in other directions, and rescues the lost ones. The Constitution is a plan of government that perfectly follows the confines of the Mark: it rules those who submit to Cain’s (Rome’s) moral guidance, and meets its enemies with force. It leaves alone Bible-following Christians who neither seek its moral guidance nor offend its dignity. The Constitution is essentially Roman, which creates the presumption of at least indirect Jesuit guidance in its development, since the Jesuits are authorized to infuse any and all constitutions with Roman Catholic doctrine. Jesuit influence on the War of 1812? Remember, the Society was “abolished” in 1773 and not resurrected until 1814. I haven’t looked into the 1812 War, so why don’t you? Yes, there was a major Jesuit influence in America during the late 1800s. Check the “Oxford

Movement” in England at about this time, which greatly Romanized the Anglican Church. I know that during Clement Clark Moore’s tenure as Professor of Greek and Hebrew literature at New York’s General Theological Seminary (1821-1850), the Seminary, basically Episcopalian, openly professed “a growing sympathy for the Roman Catholic Church, with the result that there was soon a considerable number of converts from among the seminary students.” [Sidney Ahlstrom, A Religious History of the American People, p 627] Clement C. Moore is famous for having institutionalized the Santa Claus idol with his Visit from Saint Nick, which begins “‘Twas the night before Christmas...” The poem, which went far toward removing the Bible from a Christian appreciation of the “holiday season,” was written during Moore’s second year at General. The Jesuits were very busy between the crucial years (as you call them) 1913-1920. I think a better framing would be between 1915-1942. These were the years of the Generalate of Vladimir Ledòchowski, whom I’m tempted to regard as the single most important man of the 20th century. Check him out in the New Catholic Encyclopedia. His obituary in the NY Times in December 1942 said he did “many great and important things” which future historians would write about. Yet, I can’t find any book by any historian about any great and important things he did. I think he was a power behind radio and film, and we have evidence that he funded Adolf Hitler to unite Germany under a Catholic dictator. [See 15 Brienner Strasse for more details.] Ledòchowski’s career needs to be carefully studied. Remember, though, that you’re tracking a man who covers his tracks. It won’t be easy. On contacting like-minded Christians—I’m working on trying to hold some kind of Symposium wherein several hundred of us can all visit for a long weekend, probably in California, with speakers on issues of interest to us all. THOMAS WROTE: You say the Constitution must protect Bible-reading Christians from Rome. Then why (in your opinion) were you prosecuted? You were following Constitutional and Biblical law. The money issue, whether Article I, Section 10 or Biblical law or unequal weights and measures, is legitimate. You did not challenge Cain, you demanded that Cain follow its own rules. TUPPER REPLIED: I wasn’t prosecuted for challenging Cain on Article I Section 10, although my position there definitely encouraged him to prosecute me. I was prosecuted for 26 USC 7203, “willful failure to file tax returns” for the years 1977, 78, and 79. At the threshold of the trial, the judge said “It is presumed that all parties to this action know their rights and responsibilities under the law.” Alas! I didn’t know my rights and responsibilites then. I should have rebutted that presumption on the spot. I should have asked the court to compel the IRS agent who witnessed against me to cite exactly what statute required me, a U.S.citizen having income derived from sources within the United States, to file an income tax return. But I held my peace, and so the presumption stood. All I did was defend against the charge of willfulness, and the jury found that I had not been willful in 1978 or 79, but in the first year, 1977, I had been willful. Interestingly, I put into evidence

attorney letters for 78 and 79 that advised me I could rightfully take the 5th on a tax return, but the 77 letter I could not find. (The attorney found it lodged in another client’s file a week after the verdict, but we did nothing about it because we were confident we’d win the appeal on a dozen other issues—which never happened.) Okay, the bottom line is that Cain considered me an unruly subject. He was right, because I was objecting to the income tax in a scripturally unapproved way. Read Matthew 17, Jesus at Capernaum, and you’ll see that the whole theory of Christian tax submission has to do with inoffensiveness. “Lest we offend them,” Jesus told Peter, we pay the tax if Caesar demands it. My filing status in 77, 78, and 79 was such that I had volunteered myself into compliance and here I was offensively trying to obstruct my own self-assessment. I deserved prosecution because I was offending. We now know how to disestablish from IRS without offending Cain, but I think it took all that suffering to arrive at this point—for me, at least. THOMAS WROTE: But if the kings of the earth are Cain then would not the “sons” be children of Cain and the strangers be the children of God? I had always understood this passage to teach that citizens living and working within the United States are not liable for the tax. TUPPER REPLIED: If the children of God were strangers in the U.S., they would be required by law to file and pay a tax on incomes derived from sources within the United States. However, the tax code makes no provision for U.S. citizens to file and pay on domestically-derived income. So the children of God cannot be strangers in the United States. Which means that the king of the United States is the Lord Jesus Christ. This is a powerful fact acknowledged by the authors and legislators of the internal revenue statutes. THOMAS WROTE: Again, how should we go about our lives without giving offense? You have convinced me it’s a much deeper issue than I have previously believed. TUPPER REPLIED: I find myself re-reading Chapter 25 a lot. I try to deal with every adversary from a position of love. It’s counterproductive to put people down, even if they’re wrong. There are ways of marking the right position on any point without giving offense. By saying something like “[The position you hold] is very difficult for me to deal with,” you’re putting yourself down without giving in. The adversary knows exactly where you stand and if he wants to sustain the relationship, he

must lessen the difficulty you’re having in dealing with his position. You’ve given him, in love, an opportunity to mend his ways... ================================================== Larken vs Rome Better than anyone's writing ever has, Larken Rose's concise "Taxable Income Report" clarifies how the IRS code and regulations comply with constitutional restrictions in imposing no tax liability on American citizens whose income is derived exclusively from sources within the United States. If you love watching truth being discovered, own his brilliant but unfortunately-titled homemade video "Theft By Deception" and watch it often. I say TBD is an unfortunate title because it tries to criminalize activity that is legal in commerce, whose controlling maxim is caveat emptor—which is Latin shorthand for "let the buyer beware of becoming ensnared by the illusory language lawyers use." Most Americans have been making themselves liable for income taxes not because of what the laws say but because of their illusion of what the laws say. Larken has attracted a huge host of intelligent followers, and his plan is to rub the noses of tax professionals from Congress to H&R Block in what the laws say. The idea is to pose a few simple questions to the experts and authorities which, if answered truthfully, would prove that the IRS code and regulations exclude most Americans from liability to any income tax. The IRS collapses in humiliation. Understandably, the experts go blind and deaf and dumb when Larken appears. Some time back, Larken challenged the DOJ to prosecute him, and he heard nothing for a while.... My question is, if you know that the law excludes you from its purview, why ask the IRS or anybody else if you're liable? If you're not an alien, and have no gross income from anywhere (the code defines gross income as something no U.S. citizen ever has, as long as his earnings are derived solely from sources within the United States), why would you ask anything of an agency set up to administer people having gross income? Or as Matthew Henry, in his commentary on Lev. 20:27, put it: "What greater madness can there be than for a man to go to a liar for information, and to an enemy for advice?" It's as pointless as my asking a Cardinal to show me where in the Holy Bible a saved Christian must buy indulgences to attain Christ's salvation. When one intrudes belligerently upon a jurisdiction from which one is legally excluded, one enters as an assailant. The ROE love to defend against assailants, because assailants permit them to invoke the strange and powerful war reality. In the war reality, law and reason sleep. We've seen a lot of war reality in our lifetime. It's the reality in which the WTC can be imploded into its footprint by Boeing jetliners striking high up from the outside. It's the reality in which the Pentagon can be crashed into by another Boeing jetliner whose body parts still cannot be detected by any known instruments. It's the reality in which Oswald shot JFK simultaneously from in front and behind, in which McVeigh's truck could perform impossible feats of demolition. It's the

reality in which Livy prayed on an altar in his home to the God Augustus Caesar. It's the reality of Loyolaworld, where black is white if the hierarchy says so, and whoever disbelieves is destroyed for disobedience. Larken's weapon against the ROE is truth. But the war reality has its own truth—call it anti-truth. It's something that works as well as truth in keeping the system sailing along. Moreover, the ROE have the muscle to kick down a belligerent's door and rummage through his belongings for eight hours wearing armor and talking rude and carting stuff off. They did this recently to Larken. I'm not sure Larken fully understands the authority of the rulers of evil. I personally handed him one of the first copies of ROE to come off the presses. I urged him to read it. He never indicated to me that he did; I gather from his silence on the subject and his conduct toward the IRS and DOJ that he didn't. Or perhaps he did, but disagreed with it. What's happening to Larken and his beautiful little family will happen to anyone who attempts to enforce a judgment of condemnation on the rulers of evil. Larken is armed with truth, the actual words of the IRS code. But he's also burdened by a big lie: that an agency whose laws exclude him is bound to answer his questions. He's also burdened by unscriptural conduct, which the ROE have authority to prosecute within the war reality: he's wise as a serpent but using his wisdom to destroy the IRS, which is not being harmless as a dove. This is contrary to Christ's commandment. The ROE are justified in regarding his campaign against them as terroristic. His invitation to Ashcroft to prosecute him appears to have been accepted. The DOJ will be proceeding as against an alien terrorist, and the government artisans are already developing the copy for it. The truth, which Larken has so beautifully discovered and reported, will no more get into the official record than did the teachings of Jesus make it into the official histories of Rome. Larken now finds himself on essentially the same course travelled by the tax movement, which he despises. The movement, which was reactive rather than independent, was easily manipulated and devastated by the willfulness and volatility of its members. Larken's belligerence means only that the IRS must hire more imaginative expertise to neutralize, marginalize, or demonize him and his work. It will have nothing to do with the law and everything to do with plotting, creation of circumstances, and in the end, entertainment. War reality is surreality. Larken has put himself on the stage as an actor thinking he has written the script. It would be wonderful if the play followed his script. But I believe the writer is someone Larken does not imagine, as are the director and, more importantly, the producer. The great test will be how well he sustains his integrity as new and surprising situations are thrown at him. I know him well enough to bet money that he and his issue will prevail, but not in the way any of us, including Larken, can predict. This is not a time either to criticize Larken or march in the streets waving flags for him. I'm on his list, and the image he conjures up of frightened people shrinking in the shadows I find rather distressing. This sounds like a patriot leader rallying for support, as if enough people alleging fraud would overcome the IRS. Even if allegations of IRS fraud were to reach critical mass, the media have power to neutralize, marginalize, or demonize them. To attempt to overcome the IRS generally by networking for its destruction, I think, is to insult many citizens who, for whatever reason, consent to being presumed aliens having gross income so that they can file income tax returns and pay taxes or receive refunds. To characterize these people as dupes of a fraud is reminiscent of the way the movement thought people who paid taxes were fools. There are millions of people who still derive great pleasure from buying indulgences from Rome so that the Virgin Mary might reduce their burden of guilt. What good does it do to call Rome fraudulent or those people stupid?

The great lesson of Scripture is that our lives are the result of the choices we make. We seek the truth, and make choices accordingly. If lies feel better, we make wrong choices, and work through the consequences. Whole industries—indeed the rulers of evil—operate to manage people who have made wrong choices. It's such a booming business that they maintain subdivisions dedicated to encouraging wrong choices. The only action that can overcome the IRS is for a U.S citizen, residing in the U.S. and having income derived exclusively from within the U.S,, to terminate (once outstanding debts are discharged) any conversation with the IRS. In that citizen's life, IRS has been instantly eliminated—and in good Christian form, by a simple act of reconciliation completely void of condemnation. No charges of fraud. No glove in the face. No headlines in the paper. Yet the IRS is overcome in that one household. That's being wise as a serpent and harmless as a dove, the way Christ counseled. ========================================== Getting James Earl Ray into print by F. Tupper Saussy When I resolved to challenge government on the issues of money and taxation, people warned me that I was asking for trouble. At that time, my best experience with trouble from challenging government in America was the life and work of Martin Luther King. I had been a Nashvillian, with good friends on both sides of King’s struggle. The ones I honored most were his supporters, one of whom baby-sat my little boy. I remember asking her if she could sit with him one weekend. “Friday I can,” she said with a smile, “but Saturday, we’ll be at Walgreen’s soda fountain, which probably means jail.” Here was someone for whom jailtime proved the sincerity of personal convictions. I was deeply impressed, and often thought of her while developing my resolve on money and taxation. Well, people were right. There was trouble. But always when trouble comes from taking the high side of a moral issue, the result is good. One of the many blessings that came from my troubles was that James Earl Ray heard me on talkshows and read the daily newspaper reports about me during the middle 1980s. One morning in 1986, I received a postcard from Ray, then incarcerated at Brushy Mountain State Prison. “Would you help me publish my autobiography?” he asked. I asked to see what he had, and he sent me close to 300 pages of soul-baring typed manuscript. I spent several months checking out his facts before agreeing to the project. Providentially, the state moved James to the pen in Nashville, and we were able to have a number of personal conferences. At one of these, I photographed James (the source of the watercolor at the bottom of this page) who, by the way, was an artist himself—of the style known to the art world as “naíve,” or “outsider.”

What resulted from our collaboration was Tennessee Waltz: The Making of A Political Prisoner. James was the author of record. To criticism that I “ghosted” the book, I told one reporter “James wrote his own book as surely as Presidents and Senators and Congressmen write their own speeches. He owned final edit right up to when the book went to press.” While working with James, I corresponded by mail and telephone often with Judge Jim Garrison, the former New Orleans district attorney who came close to identifying President Kennedy’s assassins. Garrison read my epilogue toTennessee Waltz (an indictment of federal economic power entitled “The Politics of Witchcraft”) and wrote me to say that “the intelligence community, which murdered Martin Luther King, is not above taking desperate measures to prevent the truth from surfacing.” At about the time Tennessee Waltz was due off the presses, the court ordered me to begin serving my misdemeanor sentence at federal prison camp in Atlanta. Taking Jim Garrison’s admonition to heart, I decided it would not be wise to make myself available, in a prison setting, to “desperate measures to prevent the truth from surfacing.” And so, as Salmon Rushdie would subsequently do to avoid reprisals from totalitarian Islamic authorities for his writings, I went into seclusion. (The ROE filter now persuades me that the intelligence community can only prevent from surfacing truth meant to impugn or obstruct their operations. Truth told can be dangerous if it doesn’t come out of love.) “It was tough,” I later recalled for a Memphis reporter, “not being able to talk about the book while I was on the Lamb. James wanted some minor errors corrected, but since there was no one to take responsibility in my absence, he republished with another ghost under another title. None of this diminishes the significance of Tennessee Waltz, in my opinion. Ours was the first comprehensive exoneration of James Earl Ray, which reached perfection in the magnificent work of William Pepper.” In its issue of April 30, 1998, the Memphis Flyer characterized Tennessee Waltz as “literate and philosophical... carefully footnoted and written in a lively, entertaining, and polemical style...a highly entertaining indictment and ridicule of Nashville society and its mediacrats, — a book stylishly edited and generously interwoven with Saussy’s own literary, intellectual, and philosophical musings... Saussy is perhaps the greatest King-assassination conspiracy theorist of them all.”

One of the book's unusual touches is the cover. If the author is famous enough, publishers often go to the trouble of embossing his autograph into the hard cover. James inscribed not only his own autograph on the cover of Tennessee Waltz, but also the six aliases he used. I have no plans to reprint Tennessee Waltz. All but about a thousand (sold) copies of this first and only edition of what Mark Lane has called “an important historical document” were stored for 14

years in a cave next to Jim Woods’ house near Manchester, Tennessee. In summer of 1999, I removed them from Jim’s cave and put them in a dry warehouse. Many of them have minor dust-jacket scratches due to paper sticking from the ups and downs of humidity. Their condition, I think, speaks volumes. Once this cache is gone, there will be no more.

COLLECTOR'S FIRST EDITION TENNESSEE WALTZ: The Making of a Political Prisoner by James Earl Ray Edited and with an Epilogue by Tupper Saussy Saint Andrew's Press, 1987. Hardcover, 322 pages with illustrations. $30.00 ========================================================== “From this room, Your Grace, I govern not only Paris, but China; not only China, but the whole world –and all without anyone knowing how it is done.” – Society of Jesus Superior General Tambourini to the Duke de Brissac, Constitutions of the Jesuits, edited by Paulin, Paris (1843) 15 Brienner Strasse by F. Tupper Saussy Sleuthing Munich About eighty-four years ago something important happened in Munich, capital of the south German state of Bavaria. The event consisted of no more than a short conversation between strangers and a gift of money. It was a stone dropped quietly in a pond, yet we all have been affected in some way by its ever-expanding ripples.

It happened in a mansion, the residence of the ambassador from the Holy See to Bavaria. Such residences are officially called “nunciatures;” the ambassador is the “nuncio.” It was not enough for me to know what the nuncio did that night in 1919, I wanted to experience the real estate he did it in. So I went to Munich looking for a nunciature. I wanted to photograph and sketch it, touch its walls, pass through its doorways, peer out its windows, stand on its floors, sniff its odors. As I studied Munich by map, a name leapt out at me. Pacelli Strasse. That's the name of the nuncio in question: Eugenio Pacelli! Had this boulevard been dedicated to the memory of Pacelli's auspicious Bavarian career? Was the nunciature located in Pacelli Strasse? The street was right around the corner from my hotel. Excitedly, I grabbed my raincoat and went looking for clues. Pacelli Strasse is tiny, no more than a few blocks long. I found an Austrian Consulate and a Café Pacelli – but alas, no former nunciature. But there was still hope, for Pacelli Strasse's main attraction is the Office of Archbishop's Affairs. I entered and explained my needs through a glass window to the receptionist. She summoned a jolly little man whose intense face evidenced a strong commitment to print. He was the archbishop's Archivist. “I'm sorry to tell you,” he said, “that the nunciature was not in Pacelli Strasse, and I would not know where it was.” I pressed. “Do you happen to have any telephone directories from the year 1919?” The Archivist brightened. “Ah, come with me,” he said. He took me down a flight of stairs into the archbishop's stacks, disappeared a few moments, and returned with an old telephone book. Our fingers did the walking until they arrived at 15 Brienner Strasse. “That is the correct address,” the Archivist beamed. “The Nunciature of the Holy See was located at 15 Brienner Strasse. Will you be taking a cab, or would you like directions?” It was a distance of about two miles on foot under a cloudy November sky with occasional drops of rain. Brienner Strasse is a fashionable thoroughfare bordered by wide sidewalks and decked with affluent high-rises, shops, and restaurants. I stopped in at Café Luitpold for a quick luncheon salad before arriving at... disappointment. Number 15, the mansion of my imagination, was not there. In fact, there was nothing but a simple park ornamented by a granite monument surmounted by a large cubic grid. The monument was inscribed: DEN OPFERN DER NATIONAL-SOZIALISTISCHEN GEWALTHERRSCHAFT Later, back at the hotel, my German-English dictionary told me that these words mean: TO THE VICTIMS OF THE NATIONAL-SOCIALIST DESPOTISM Anyone researching rulers of evil would know this rhetoric was more than just another civic-minded apology for the ravages of Nazism. I had amassed facts that reveal this granite cage, whose bars are crosses interlaced with swastikas (study the design carefully), to be a historical marker that every human being should know. It proves that mankind is ruled by a legitimate authority that most of us ignore or misjudge at our peril.

Let me acquaint you with some of these facts. Who's Who at Number 15? Eighty-two years ago, 15 Brienner Strasse housed three vital players in world politics: Eugenio Pacelli, Archbishop of Sardi, nuncio to Bavaria, and administrator of the Vatican's foreign affairs; his housekeeper, a Holy Cross nun named Pascalina; and his Jesuit speech-writer Robert Lieber. Eugenio Pacelli had served in the Church's diplomatic service since his ordination in 1899. His international sensibilities had been mentored by the Jesuits, one of whom—Vladimir Ledochowski—he idolized. I say “idolized” because this is the exact word an elderly Jesuit I interviewed in Rome employed to describe Pacelli's relationship to Ledochowski. He'd known both figures personally. Vladimir Ledochowski was a Polish aristocrat who by 1906 had demonstrated such exceptional skills in international diplomacy that Jesuit Superior General Franz Xavier Wernz (under whose tutelage Pacelli had done his postgraduate research in canon law) appointed him Consultor General for Germany, Austria-Hungary, Russia, Bosnia, Serbia, Croatia, and Poland, as well as Belgium and the Netherlands. “Consultor General” is the equivalent of a cabinet post. It empowered Ledochowski to lace the future of his nations with alliances that lay buried like so many land-mines. This is not an unusual feat for a Jesuit strategist. Indeed, the Society of Jesus (which is the pope's private CIA and veritable Mother of spies) is renowned for “Othelloizing” nations—setting them up for mutual destruction, as when Othello's trusted but treacherous advisor Iago gloats to the audience, “Now whether he kill Cassio or Cassio him, or each do kill the other, every way makes my gain.” (It's foolish, in my opinion, not to suspect a covert military strategist of anything he has authority, means, and requirement to do. To ignore him is to be conquered by his strategy, which is usually to foster ignorance of his most decisive operations.) Triggering World War Most historians agree that the first World War was triggered by the Serbian Concordat of June 1914. Eugenio Pacelli was the Concordat's acknowledged author, but Vladimir Ledochowski had authority, means, and requirement to ghost it. The Serbian Concordat promised (a) Vatican support of Serbia's liberation from Roman Catholic Austria-Hungary, while (b) pitting Roman Catholic evangelism against the Serbian state religion, Eastern Orthodoxy, a faith that denies the supremacy of the Roman papacy. Such a policy was sure to provoke belligerency between Austria-Hungary and Serbia, just as Jesuit military strategy created enmity between America and Great Britain to incite a Revolution that resulted in the world's first republic governable by Roman Catholic laypersons. The underlying purpose of the Serbian Concordat, like the Declaration of Independence, was to restructure the world according to the requirements of Rome. What those requirements were we shall learn presently. Four days after Eugenio Pacelli signed the Concordat, a Serbian terrorist assassinated the heir to the Austro-Hungarian throne. Within weeks, nations with no more reason to make war than the alliances they had signed began outfitting their respective soldiery for what looked like Armageddon.

Reorganization Death hit the Vatican, too. On August 19, 1914, Jesuit General Wernz died suddenly, followed the next day by Pope Pius X—of heartbreak, it was rumored, over the world's disintegration. To succeed Pius, the college of cardinals chose a professional diplomat, Giacomo della Chiesa, who assumed the name Benedict XV. It took the Jesuits six months to elect a Superior General to succeed Wernz. There's no more powerful political office on earth than Superior General of the Society of Jesus. It commands absolute, unquestioned obedience. The proposition that Jesus Christ is to be seen in the person of the Superior General is repeated no less than five hundred times in the Society's Constitutions. Vladimir Ledochowski was chosen General by his Jesuit electors. The man idolized by Eugenio Pacelli now had full authority to cause America to desire war against Germany. We have heard many reasons why America entered World War I. Statesmen argued that it was “the war to end all wars,” while pacifists charged it was a war to support British imperialism. Actual outcome points to another, less apparent yet more practical reason. . The Purpose of World War I Immediately upon assuming his Generalate, Vladimir Ledochowski fled Rome (Austria, after all, was now at war with Italy) and set up office with two assistants in his mother's castle at Zizers, Switzerland. In 1917, Ledochowski invited Mathias Erzberger, a deputy from the German Catholic Center party, to Zizers for a secret meeting. Erzberger later reported to friends that the General had persuaded him to support a strategy of destroying the unified Reich under the Protestant Kaiser Wilhelm II in order to bring the Catholic nations of central and eastern Europe together in a pan-German federation under a charismatic dictator charged with subduing the communist menace from the east. Dr. Hans Carossa, documenting the deputy's fact patterns after Zizers, observed that “Every political maneuver that Erzberger has engaged in since his discussion with the Jesuit General has only served to advance this Jesuit political strategy.” (Manfred Barthel, The Jesuits, William Morrow, p. 254-5) Means A: The Lusitania As much as Ledochowski needed to mobilize America against Germany, America was disinterested in European events. In fact, President Woodrow Wilson repeatedly declared that Europe's calamities were of absolutely no concern to Americans. But soon after Ledochowski ensconced in Zizers (locals pronounce it "Caesar's"), things started going his way. A German submarine sank the RMS Lusitania off the coast of Ireland with 128 Americans aboard. This act, wrote Jim Marrs in his study of clandestine governments (Rule By Secrecy, HarperCollins, 2000), “set off a firestorm of anti-German feeling throughout the United States, fanned by the Rockefeller-[J.P.] Morgan dominated press.” Marrs added that “Morgan was the Rothschilds' American representative—some say partner.”

The house of Rothschild is bound by fiduciary duty to facilitate the Jesuit General's needs. According to Encyclopedia Judaica, the Rothschilds are “Guardians of the Vatican Treasury.” The Rothschild press used the Lusitania to foment hatred among Americans toward “the hideous Hun.” But a stunt even more dramatic was needed to secure a declaration of war. Means B: The Zimmerman Telegram War resulted from the famous Zimmerman Telegram, which the Rothschild press sensationally published in America on March 1, 1917. In the telegram, supposedly decoded by British interceptors, German foreign minister Arthur Zimmermann proposed to the German ambassador in Mexico a German-Mexican alliance against the United States in which Germany would support the Mexican recapture of territory in Texas, Arizona and New Mexico. A German official talking secretly of invading Texas, Arizona, and New Mexico brought the war suddenly home! Normally, when the alleged proponent of such an explosive notion—true or not—is asked for verification, he follows good diplomatic form and categorically denies responsibility. Not Arthur Zimmermann. At a Berlin news conference on March 3rd, a reporter for the Hearst papers—which columnist George Seldes terms "the most pro-Catholic press in America”—caught Zimmermann's attention and stated: “Of course Your Excellency will deny this story.” Zimmermann replied, “I cannot deny it. It is true.” Is this a script, or what? Zimmermann's inexplicable admission (and shamefully unprofessional, unless done in obedience to the General or the Rothschilds) gave President Wilson no alternative but to ask Congress for precisely what Vladimir Ledochowski desired: a declaration that a state of war existed with Germany. Congress complied on April 6, the Guardians of the Vatican Treasury cranked out the credit (through the Rothschilds' brand new Federal Reserve), and over the next year and a half, more than 364,000 American lives were sacrificed (out of 4,355,000 mobilized) to Ledochowski's objective of destroying the Reich and replacing its Protestant Kaiser with a charismatic dictator. Came Armistice Day, November 11, 1918, the Reich was devastated . The Kaiser had fled for the safety of Holland. Power-drunk from overthrowing czarist Russia, Bolshevik mobs flying red flags overran Bavaria. All Munich's diplomatic legations returned to their home countries. The Vatican nunciature alone remained. On June 28, 1919, the Allies presented the Treaty of Versailles for Germany to sign. The Diktat, as Germans called it (“dictated peace”), only perfected their devastation—forcing them to accept sole responsibility for the war, ripping great chunks of territory away from the Reich, and reducing German naval and military power to practically nil. The moment had arrived for the introduction of Vladimir Ledochowski's “charismatic dictator.” He entered history at 15 Brienner Strasse late one blustery night during the winter following the Diktat...

Mission Accomplished Sister Pascalina recalled the moment for her biographers, Paul Murphy and Rene Arlington (La Popessa, Viking, 1983). The nunciature was asleep. Pascalina heard knocking at the door. She answered to find a young Austrian soldier standing there, a corporal and a Catholic, bearing a letter of introduction from a leading Bavarian politician citing him for acts of bravery during the war. Pascalina issued the young man into the sitting room and awoke Archbishop Pacelli. Their meeting went fast. The soldier vowed to check the spread of atheistic communism in Munich and elsewhere. Pascalina heard Pacelli say, “Munich has been good to me, so has Germany. I pray Almighty God that this land remain a holy land, in the hands of Our Lord, and free of communism.” She then saw Pacelli give the soldier “a large cache of Church money to aid the rising revolutionary and his small, struggling band of anticommunists.” “Go, quell the devil's works,” the archbishop told him. “Help spread the love of Almighty God.” Sister Pascalina never forgot the young soldier's face or his name—Adolf Hitler. Reflections Of course, in 1939 Eugenio Pacelli was elected Pope Pius XII, whom John Paul II moved toward sainthood with beatification in 1998. Catholic author and Cambridge scholar John Cornwell contends in Hitler's Pope: The Secret History of Pius XII (Viking, 1999) that Pacelli's tactical subservience to Hitler, particularly his refusal to intercede with the Fuhrer's treatment of the Jews, depended upon “a fatal combination of high spiritual aspirations in conflict with soaring ambition for power and control.” In other words, “Ignore Vladimir Ledochowski; look no further than His Holiness, in the same way you look no further than Oswald, Ray, Koresh, or McVeigh.” Although it fails to consider the pope's very real legal relationship to the man he idolized (immediately after Ledochowski's death in 1942, Pius nominated him for canonization), Cornwell's estimable book is still our most revealing examination of Pacelli's inner career. Scholars need to learn that the Church is perennially at war with every non-Catholic, a fact proved by the existence and record of the Jesuits. His task of defending the sacraments places the Superior General in control of the entire Church Militant. In certain circumstances, he is entitled to require obedience of the pope—for the sake of Rome. And so I submit that the policies of Pius XII were not his to make but rather those of Vladimir Ledochowski. The Society of Jesus will never agree to this, I know. As Manfred Barthel has explained, “Jesuit sources always blandly insist that the General concerned himself entirely with spiritual and administrative matters and never gave politics a thought.” We've seen how 15 Brienner Strasse is dedicated “to the victims of the national-socialist despotism.” The word translated “victims” is opfern, which means “sacrificial victims,” opfern being a cognate of “offerings.” Are we being told here that the Holocaust, such as occurred, was a form of ritual, a human sacrifice perceived necessary to propitiate some divinity?

If so, it is a message consistent with my Rulers of Evil hypothesis that the vast, amorphous institution known as Rome, under the military leadership of the Superior General of the Society of Jesus, is divinely empowered to rule evildoers under the seal given by God Almighty to Cain. An evildoer, according to the Bible, is anyone who prefers other gods to the Jesus Christ of Scripture. With its crown of interlocking swastikas and crosses, 15 Brienner Strasse pays tribute to those souls, regardless of religious persuasion, who placed their faith in a ministry of righteousness operated by the satanic majesty. The many who denied Christ yet escaped the sacrificial altar did so only by the grace of God. W Post Script: With profound appropriateness typical of the Vatican Way, the Last Reigning Empress of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, Zita von Hapsburg, lived out her final twenty years of life in the very castle from which the destruction of her Empire was administered. She died at Zizers in 1989 at the age of 97. BACK TO ARTICLES ----=====================================

A grant from the trickster Mercury, “the Trickster,” Roman god of commerce and evildoers, hands a bag of gold to Superintendent of Finance Robert Morris, highest government official under the Articles of Confederation. This remarkable transaction was painted into the U.S. Capitol Rotunda by Vatican artist Constantino Brumidi in 1866. It lucidly visualizes the well-known Golden Rule of political economies, “He who holds the gold . . .rules.” Rulers of Evil demonstrates how Brumidi actually depicted historic truth about Roman influence over the formation of United States government.

Roman to the Core by F. Tupper Saussy Many Americans are legally forced, beyond their desire or ability, to work for powerful foreign operators. Consider the American farmer whose crop prices in his own country are permitted by Congress to be undercut by imported grain that must be sold here to keep a foreign bank’s debtor from defaulting. Or the American taxpayer whose home is seized by the IRS, its value going to compensate the International Monetary Fund for some middle-eastern loan that went bad. Could it be that the coercion of American citizens into an international economic agenda is the logical outworking of a religious manifesto? The problem A manifesto known as “Vatican II” — the Roman Catholic “Constitution On The Church” propounded by the Second Vatican Council in 1964 — summons Roman Catholics who hold office in secular government to “vigorously contribute their effort so that the goods of this world may be more equitably distributed among all men.” Many Americans who know little and care less about Roman Catholicism elect to important public offices men and women subject to Vatican II. In so doing they place their fortunes at the disposal of Vatican internationalism. The truth is, American secular authority clings to a Catholic infrastructure which the celebrity newscasters give us only occasional glimpses of. We caught a fleeting glance eight years ago in Carl Bernstein’s remarkable Time Magazine article on how the President of the United States “conspired” — Bernstein’s word, not mine— with Pope John Paul II to bring about the demise of the Soviet Union. (Two weeks later, Time published the shocked response of a University of Massachusetts sociology professor: Last week I taught my students about the separation of church and state. This week I learned that the Pope is running U.S. foreign policy. No wonder our young people are cynical about American ideals.) Bernstein noted that the leading American players behind the secret Reagan/Holiness conspiracy were all “devout Roman Catholics”— namely CIA Director William Casey, National Security Advisors Richard Allen and Judge William Clark, Secretary of State Alexander Haig, Ambassador-at-Large Vernon Walters, and Ambassador to the Vatican State William Wilson. But he failed to mention that the entire Senate Foreign Relations committee was governed by Roman Catholics as well — specifically, Senators John Kerry (Terrorism, Narcotics, and International Communications), Daniel P. Moynihan (Near Easter and South Asian Affairs), Paul Sarbanes (International Economic Policy, Trade, Oceans & Environment), and Christopher Dodd (Western Hemisphere and Peace Corps Affairs); not to mention that American domesticpolicy

was under the leadership of Roman Catholics George Mitchell (Senate Majority Leader) and Tom Foley (Speaker of the House of Representatives) Indeed, when Bernstein’s story hit the stands, there was virtually no arena of federal legislative activity that was not directly controlled by a Roman Catholic senator or representative. Each and every one of these legislators was a Roman Catholic layperson subject to Vatican II’s instructions to use his or her secular offices to advance the cause of Roman Catholicism. Vatican II calls upon Catholic politicians, “whoever they are...to expend all their energy for the growth of the Church and its continuous sanctification” so as “to make the Church present and operative in those places and circumstances where only through them can it become the salt of the earth” (IV, 33). Catholic politicians having secular monetary and taxing authority (“by their competence in secular disciplines and by their activity”) are called upon to redistribute worldly goods according to the Church’s design -- “[to] vigorously contribute their effort so that...the goods of this world may be more equitably distributed among all men, and may in their own way be conducive to universal progress in human and Christian freedom” (IV, 36). Nothing in American law forbids this from happening. The “free exercise” clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution protects a religious establishment’s right to encourage its believers not only to ensconce themselves in secular government, but also to use any legitimate means to subject otherwise uncooperative fellow-citizens to its agenda of internationalizing private American wealth. When legislators, executives, and judges seem to put the welfare of other nations ahead of their own, it may not be treason they are committing. They may well be freely exercising the Roman Catholic religion of Vatican II. The remedy But what of those millions of Americans who do not believe they are looking to Roman Catholicism for their moral guidance? Is there some legal or theological premise that requires non-Catholics to part with large portions of their income annually in order to underwrite Vatican II’s international agenda? I can’t speak for all moral disciplines, but I know that the Bible urges the followers of Christ not to pay self-assessed taxes. When Jesus and Peter arrived at Capernaum, the customs agents asked Peter “Doth not your master pay tribute?” To which Peter replied, “Yes.” Although the New International Version distorts the context of Matthew 17:24-27 to Rome’s advantage by rendering Peter’s crucial reply as “Yes, He does,” the fact remains that Peter was affirming a negative. “Yes, He doth not” is the grammatically correct inference. Jesus was not a taxpayer. Tribute, in law, is a sum paid to a superior potentate to secure his friendship or protection. Since the potentate for whom the Capernaum agents were soliciting— Tiberias Caesar— was not superior to Jesus, our Lord took Peter aside and lectured him briefly on why the children of God are not required to pay tribute. Having excluded himself and Peter from taxation, Jesus then defined the law of tribute: “However, lest we offend them,...give unto them.” If excluding ourselves offends the potentate, we give to him. And if the potentate is not offended by our exclusion, we are free to dedicate our resources to the family of God. The American potentate, which the facts identify as Roman to the core, demands tribute

through uniform excise taxes on a wide range of objects — petroleum, chemicals, alcohol, hazardous waste, insurance, tires, etc. We secure its friendship and protection by paying these taxes without flinching. But the potentate makes no such demand on income earned by United States citizens from sources derived within the nation’s borders. It is as though Internal Revenue law was written by biblical scholars impeccably well-versed in Matthew 17! For the law denies the potentate the right to be offended by the exclusion of the children of God from income taxation. Indeed, just as Jesus declared, “the children are free.” However, many U.S. citizens, among whom are huge numbers of nominal Christians, have empowered the potentate to demand tribute. They have done this by making themselves liable for taxation on domestically-sourced income by that process the IRS calls “voluntary self-assessment.” Since the assessment does not arise from the potentate but from the citizenry, the potentate rightly takes offense when a citizen attempts to renege on his self-assessment. There is important Christian scripture on self-assessed tribute, the ignorance of which I believe has robbed American Christianity (as opposed to the Body of Christ) of the power of God. The precept, given at II Kings 20:12-18, is that if sanctified resources are voluntarily disclosed to a potentate, God authorizes the potentate to capture those resources and dispose of them at its pleasure. Until those who profess Christianity begin examining and exercising the U.S. citizen’s miraculous exclusion from income taxation, America will continue suffering under the divine curse that attends voluntary self-assessment. American Christianity will continue, as Paul put it, “having a form of godliness but denying the power thereof...” ======================================================= Rulers Of Evil (Conspiracy Nation, 3/3/04) -- After Cain slew Abel, God set a "mark" upon him to protect Cain. This "mark" gave Cain great power. The "mark" was in other words an insignia, seal or badge of authority, subsequently passed on to Cain's descendants. According to author F. Tupper Saussy, Cain's mark is the foundation of the world's legal system. (Rulers Of Evil by F. Tupper Saussy. New York: HarperCollins, 1999. ISBN: 0-06-621083-6) The Roman empire inherited Cain's power. Later, according to some, the "leopard changed its spots" and became the Roman Catholic Church. Saussy shows how the Roman church by means of her conspiratorial Society of Jesus (the Jesuits) infiltrated and instigated the American Revolutionary War. Reportedly the motive for post-Revolution freedom of religion was to allow Catholics to vote. There are millions of good Catholics in the world who sincerely follow Christian ideals. Nonetheless they appear to be the dupes for a larger scheme which continues to entrench ancient Roman power, according to many.

In light of the above, the revelation of author Philip K. Dick is worth mentioning. Robert Anton Wilson, in his encyclopedia of conspiracy theories, Everything Is Under Control (New York: HarperCollins, 1998. ISBN: 0-06-273417-2) describes what happened to science fiction author Dick: "...in February 1974, Dick had a tooth extraction for which he was given sodium pentathol... For over a month, February to March, Dick watched as his whole universe collapsed and was replaced not by a new universe but by a series of hypothetical or virtual universes... As he returned to comparative normalcy, Dick came more and more to think of the Experience as a revelation of the greatest false memory case in history, imposed on all humanity, from which he had partially awakened. That is, The Empire Never Ended: most of the last 2000 years of history never happened. We have been brainwashed by the Roman Empire to think we are living in a totally false world..." Also pairing with Philip K. Dick's ideas is Saussy's mention of the gnostic concept that this earth is ruled by an evil god. "...the Higher God avoided human matter, and so lordship over the material world belonged to Satanael, the evil brother of Jesus." Compare this with what Dick wrote in his novel, VALIS (New York: Vintage Books, 1991. ISBN: 0-679-73446-5): "He [Samael] said, 'I am god and no other one exists except me.' But when he said these things, he sinned against all of the immortal ones, and they protected him... Samael was the creator deity and he imagined that he was the only god, as stated in Genesis. However, he was blind, which is to say, occluded... Man and the true God are identical but a lunatic blind creator and his screwed-up world separate man from God." It cannot be stressed enough that things are not as they seem. Consider the following, provided by Saussy: * The Rothschilds, according to the Encyclopedia Judaica, are entitled "Guardians of the Vatican Treasury." * During the Revolutionary War, American patriots fought under the flag of the East India Company, itself controlled by the Jesuits. * The Roman numerals (excluding M, later tacked on) D (500) C (100) L (50) X (10) V (5) and I (1), when added, total 666. * Patron saint of the state of Maryland is Ignatius Loyola, founder of the Jesuits. Carved out from Maryland is the Federal District, Washington, DC. The Capitol building was erected on Lot 666 of the Federal District. * The very name, "Capitol," indicates a Roman temple dedicated to Jupiter (from the Latin Capitolium). * The Latin Annuit Coeptis (found, for example, on the dollar bill) comes from a prayer to Jupiter in Book IX of Virgil's Aeneid. * Roman symbol of authority, the fasces (ax heads), are flaunted behind the Speaker of the House's rostrum in the U.S. Capitol. A popular anecdote from the Revolutionary War notes the timely appearance of a man called "the professor." This mysterious person appears at an opportune moment as elder statesman and diplomatist, crucially soothing disagreements amongst colonial leaders. That man, "the professor," was none other than Lorenzo Ricci, Superior General of the Jesuits, as shown by Saussy in his book. Ricci, not George Washington, is the true "Father of the country." In a contemporary sense, Saussy's views shed light on the release of Mel Gibson's film, The Passion. Gibson has done admirable work, for example in the film Conspiracy Theory. Nonetheless it should be pointed out that Gibson is connected with a far-right movement in the Roman Catholic Church which wants to restore Latin to church services. His film, The Passion, has been approved by the Roman pontiff, John Paul II. Add to this the uproar by Jews at perceived anti-semitism in Gibson's latest film, and questions come to mind.

Not intended by Conspiracy Nation is to stir up a hornets nest. Yet sometimes hard things need to be considered. ------- Conspiracy Nation. Think outside the box. http://www.shout.net/~bigred/cn.html ----------------------[============================ For those interested in learning how the Vatican is recognized as a State, how it survived a lawsuit filed against it and how this recognition destroys the separation of Church and State in this country, read the following written by Tupper Saussy, as well as some other interesting Vatican tid-bits taken from his book, Rulers of Evil. Few people seem to be aware that the Roman Catholic Church in America is officially recognized as a State. How this came about makes interesting reading. Early in his administration, President Ronald Reagan invited the Vatican City, whose ruling head is the Pope, to open its first embassy in Washington, D.C. His Holiness responded positively, and the embassy, or Apostolic Nunciature of the Holy See, opened officially on January 10, 1984. Shortly thereafter, a complaint was filed against President Reagan at U.S. District Court in Philadelphia by the American Jewish Congress, the Baptist Joint Committee on Public Affairs, Seventh Day Adventists, the National Council of Churches, the National Association of Evangelicals, and Americans United for Separation of Church and State. The plaintiffs sought to have the Court declare that the administration had unconstitutionally granted to the Roman Catholic faith privileges that were being denied to other establishments of religion. On May 7, 1985 the suit was thrown out by Chief Judge John Fullam. Judge Fullam ruled that district courts do not have jurisdiction to intervene in "foreign policy decisions" of the executive branch. Bishop James W. Malone, President of the U.S. Catholic Conference, praised Judge Fullam's decision, noting that it settled "not a religious issue but a public policy question." The plaintiffs appealed. The Third Circuit denied the appeal, noticing that "the Roman Catholic Church's unique position of control over a sovereign territory gives it advantages that other religious organizations do not enjoy." The Apostolic Nunciature at 3339 Massachusetts Avenue N.W. enables Pontifex Maximus to supervise more closely American civil government "public policy" as administered through Roman Catholic laypersons. (One such layperson was Chief Judge Fullam, whose Roman Catholicism apparently escaped the attention of the plaintiffs.) This same imperium ran pagan Rome in essentially the same way. The public servants were priests of the various gods and goddesses. Monetary affairs, for example, were governed by priests of the goddess Moneta. Priests of Dionysus managed architecture and cemeteries, while priests of Justitia, with her sword, and Libera, blindfolded, holding her scales aloft, ruled the courts. Hundreds of priestly orders, known as the Sacred College, managed hundreds of government bureaus, from the justice system to the construction, cleaning, and repair of bridges (no bridge could be built without the approval of Pontifex Maximus), buildings, temples, castles, baths, sewers, ports, highways, walls and ramparts of cities and the boundaries of lands. Priests directed the paving and repairing of streets and roads, supervised the calendar and the education of youth. Priests regulated weights, measures, and the value of money. Priests solemnized and certified births, baptisms, puberty, purification, confession, adolescence, marriage, divorce, death, burial, excommunication, canonization, deification, adoption into families, adoption into tribes and orders of nobility. Priests ran the libraries, the museums, the consecrated lands and treasures. Priests registered the trademarks and symbols. Priests were in charge of public worship, directing the festivals, plays, entertainments, games and ceremonies. Priests wrote and held custody over wills, testaments, and legal conveyances. By the fourth century, one half of the lands and one fourth of the population of the Roman Empire were owned by the priests. When the Emperor Constantine and his Senate formally adopted Christianity as the Empire's official religion,

theexercise was more of a merger or acquisition than a revolution. The wealth of the priests merely became the immediate possession of the Christian churches, and thepriests merely declared themselves Christians. Government continued without interruption. The pagan gods and goddesses were artfully outfitted with names appropriate to Christianity. The sign over the Pantheon indicating "To [the fertility goddess] Cybele and All the Gods" was re-written "To Mary and All the Saints." The Temple of Apollo became the Church of St.Apollinaris. The Temple of Mars was reconsecrated Church of Santa Martina, with the inscription "Mars hence ejected, Martina, martyred maid/ Claims now the worship which to him was paid." Haloed icons of Apollo were identified as Jesus, and the crosses of Bacchus and Tammuz were accepted as the official symbol of the Crucifixion. Pope Leo I decreed that "St. Peter and St. Paul have replaced Romulus and Remus as Rome's protecting patrons." Pagan feasts, too, were Christianized. December 25 the celebrated birthday of a number of gods, among them Saturn, Jupiter, Tammuz, Bacchus, Osiris, and Mithras was claimed to have been that of Jesus as well, and the traditional Saturnalia, season of drunken merriment and gift-giving, evolved into Christmas. Bacchus was popular in ancient France under his Greek name Dionysus or, as the French rendered it, Denis. His feast, the Festum Dionysi, was held every seventh day of October, at the end of the vintage season. After two days of wild partying, another feast was held, the Festum Dionysi Eleutherei Rusticum ("Country Festival of Merry Dionysus"). The papacy cleverly brought the worshippers of Dionysus into its jurisdiction by transforming the words Dionysos, Bacchus, Eleutherei, and Rusticum into a group of Christian martyrs. October seventh was entered on the Liturgical Calendar as the feast day of "St. Bacchus the Martyr," while October ninth was instituted as the "Festival of St. Denis, and of his companions St. Eleuthere and St. Rustic." The Catholic Almanac (1992 et seq) sustains the fabrication by designating October ninth as the Feast Day of Denis, bishop of Paris, and two companions identi- fied by early writers as Rusticus, a priest, and Eleutherius, a deacon martyred near Paris. Denis is popularly regarded as the apostle and patron saint of France. Playing loose with truth and Scripture in order to bring every human creature into subjection to the Roman Pontiff is a technique called "missionary adaptation." Vatican literature explains this as "the adjustment of the mission subject to the cultural requirements of the mission object" so that the papacy's needs will be brought "as much as possible in accord with existing socially shared patterns of thought, evaluation, and action, so as to avoid unnecessary and serious disorganization." Rome has so seamlessly adapted its mission to American secularism that we do not think of the United States as a Catholic system. Yet the rosters of government rather decisively show this to be the case. By far the greatest challenge to missionary adaptation has been Scripture that is, the Old and New Testaments, commonly known as the Holy Bible. Almost for as long as Rome has been the seat of Pontifex Maximus, there has been a curious enmity between between the popes and the Bible whose believers they are presumed to head. For more informative articles, go to www.arcticbeacon.com ================================= September 2004 Sympathy for Mr. Cheney To prepare for this article: http://911research.wtc7.net/index.html by F. Tupper Saussy

Now that Michael Ruppert (www.fromthewilderness.com) has shown that the whole 9/11 attack on America was masterminded and overseen by Dick Cheney, I suppose the Vice-President is preparing an apologist to take the heat. Of course, the media gateways will do everything in their power to prevent the public's being as informed as Mr. Ruppert, but thanks to the internet, people are being brought up to speed very quickly. Before too long, millions of people are likely to be furious, perhaps even vengeful, at Mr. Cheney. He has thus far been very effective at enshrouding his responsibilities in darkness and confusion, but I doubt that he is prepared to defend in the clear light of day. Until his apologist appears, I hereby tender my unsolicited services, but only pro tem. The United States of America (USA) is a type of corporation, having a President, Vice-President, a cabinet serving as the equivalent of a board of directors, and millions of stockholders who, by voting, give power to congressmen and senators to represent their interests in the corporation. Should individual stockholders grow dissatisfied with a representative, satisfaction is often unattainable until the representative stands for re-election, and even then is not assured. The President is also Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of the United States, which means that the USA is a war-making corporation, having a beast's capacity to exercise life and death power over its inferiors. Indeed, the biblical term "beast" best describes the heart, soul and nature of the USA, which after all confesses itself to be a beast (an eagle), while its dominant political parties characterize themselves as an elephant and an ass. The USA lives in a beast's reality, a military reality defined by generals, men and women who have risen to supremacy through successful competition. Competition produces winners and losers, and generals are winners. The Commander-in-Chief is the general of generals: the Superior General. But he has an alter ego. If, in order to structure a deeply secret operation, the President is unable to act as Superior General, Art. 2 Sec. 1, clause 6 of the Constitution empowers the Vice-President "to discharge the Powers and Duties" of the presidency in case of presidential inability. Every general knows that winning, whether in war or the jungle, requires exceptional skills in deception. A well-designed and executed ruse, aimed at an enemy or the general's own men or nation, can confound, instill fear, provoke to fruitless extremes, tap precious resources, sap energies, and ultimately make the general a conqueror with very little actual combat. The ruse is, by far, the most economical weapon in the Commander-in-Chief's arsenal. As Michael Ruppert's evidence clearly shows, the events of 9/11 were a ruse. The objective of the ruse was to motivate, first, the American public and then other nations, to surrender voluntarily, in the illusion of avenging an indefinite nemesis, huge amounts of private rights and wealth to development projects in the middle east. At a cost of less than 4,000 lives and minimal expense of materiel, the Commander-in-Chief was able to stage, in a single day, an event that produced legislation empowering his executive department to search and seize greater amounts of life, liberty, and property with fewer restraints than ever before in the history of the Constitution. This is masterful war-making. But nothing new. When President George W. Bush became America's superior general, the future course of the United States had been already determined by his father. It helps to recall that in January 1989, the elder Bush began his superior generalate with an inaugural address prayer: "Heavenly Father...Make us strong to do Your work, willing to heed and hear Your will, and write on our hearts these words: ‘Use power to help people.' For we are given power not to advance our own purposes, nor to make a great show in the world, nor a name. There is but one just use of power, and it is to serve people. Help us to remember it, Lord. Amen."

Bush then flew to the Vatican City for an audience with Pope John Paul II on the following May 27th. Since the Papacy rules ex cathedra, "from the chair," the reigning Pope may be the undesignated de facto Chairman of the United States corporation. (I for one have arrived at that understanding upon realizing that the interface between the American Presidency, the Roman Papacy, registered voters, and the world at large mimics that between a corporation's president, board chairman, stockholders, and consumers.) At the audience, His Holiness cited the President’s inaugural prayer. “Mr. President,” he said, “you made reference to power as existing to help people, to serve people. This is true at different levels, including power at the political and economic level. We see this, too, at the level of each community, with its power of fraternal love and concern." The Chairman, one of whose titles is Patriarch of the West, then gently gave orders to the President: "In all these areas, an immense challenge opens up before the United States in this third century of her nationhood. Her mission as a people engaged in good works and committed to serving others has horizons the length of your nation and far beyond – as far as humanity extends. Today the interdependence of humanity is being reaffirmed and recognized through world events. The moral and social attitudes that must constitute a response to this interdependence is found in worldwide solidarity. In treating this question in a recent encyclical, I have stated that solidarity is... a firm and persevering determination to commit oneself to the common good; that is to say, to the good of all and of each individual, because we are all really responsible for all. Truly, the hour of international interdependence has struck. What is at stake is the common good of humanity." Who can deny that on May 27, 1989 the Chairman was instructing the President to use the corporation's power to create world events in order to advance international interdependence, or solidarity? Solidarity is what the nuclear blasts at Hiroshima and Nagasaki brought to Japan: a new culture structured on the 12th-century Roman church-militant's invention of debt instruments circulating and enforced internationally as money. It's what the Coinage Act immediately following the sacrificial assassination of President John F. Kennedy brought to the United States: debt money, made viable by compulsory acceptance. Debt money, as opposed to gold and silver coin, transfers the responsibility for charity from individual conscience to the corporation, which creates wealth and distributes it liberally to its most faithful consumers. It places economic opportunity in every hand, whether productive or non-productive, resulting in a confusion of moral and social attitudes which are regulated for profit by the Chairman and his international hierarchy of rulers of evil. Have we forgotten what happened in the wake of Bush's audience with the Pope in May 1989? The day after the Pope declared the striking of the "hour of interdependence," Saddam Hussein, Iraqi premier, stood before the brotherhood of Muslim nations known as the League of Arab States and leveled charges that Kuwait had launched an unprovoked economic aggression against Iraq. (Kuwait had been an independent nation for 25 years when in 1986 the oil-rich al-Sabah family disbanded the token National Assembly and delivered all power to the ruling Emir, who brutally suppressed free speech and established a labor force of immigrants willing to work under conditions of near-slavery.) Saddam complained to the League that Kuwait's policy of overproducing oil and driving oil prices downward would ultimately cost Iraq some $14 billion in lost revenues. He hinted at military action if the situation was not corrected. America's allies then began cancelling "hundreds of major scientific, engineering, and food supply contracts with Iraq," in the words of Iraqi Deputy Prime Minister Ramadan. Strange treatment for a Premier who, from 1980 to 1988, had been a prized American ally himself. As Ted Koppel

would later observe, the elder Bush operated "largely behind the scenes through the 1980s, [to] initiate and support much of the financing, intelligence and military help that built Saddam's Iraq..." (Nightline, June 1992) The Emir of Kuwait ignored Saddam's complaint because he was assured by Bush administrators that his advantages over Iraq would be protected by American armed forces. He continued aggravating, even to the point of using slant drilling technology to steal oil from Iraq’s Rumaylah oil field. Stealing from a Muslim brother and waging economic war against him are both counted sins in Islamic law, yet no Islamic court ever acquired jurisdiction. US Ambassador to Iraq April Glaspie declared publicly to Saddam, "I have a direct instruction from President [Bush] to seek better relations with Iraq." Encouraged by this instruction, Saddam invaded Kuwait on August 2 with a sufficient number of troops to hold Kuwait City. Photos from Soviet commercial satellites show that no more than a few thousand Iraqis were deployed. Next day, in accord with Islamic law, the Arab League's council of ministers of resolved to (a) condemn the invasion, (b) convoke an extraordinary summit to find a Muslim solution to the crisis, and (c) reject foreign intervention, whether direct or indirect, in Muslim affairs. Saddam Hussein made it clear that he was willing to withdraw from Kuwait if his claims could be satisfied. There was no reason why Muslim brethren, acting in good faith, could not settle the matter. In fact, on August 4th Saddam was so confident of a peaceful resolution that Baghdad radio announced that Iraq was ready to pull out of Kuwait the next day. But peaceful resolution between Muslim states would not serve the Chairman’s Roman agenda for “worldwide solidarity.” For this, political Islam must be divided and conquered. Which was easily accomplished when two crucial members of the summit, Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak and King Fahd of Saudi Arabia, turned against Iraq. They did so, according to a study by Hugh Roberts of the London School of Economics & Political Science, under pressure from Dick Cheney, Bush's Secretary of Defense. “What then happened,” wrote Roberts, “was a massive escalation of the crisis engineered wholly and entirely by the United States, which split the Arab world down the middle, destroyed the credibility and influence of the Arab League and scotched all chance of a peaceful settlement.” Nine days after Saddam's march on Kuwait City, the Kuwaiti government contracted the New York public relations firm of Hill & Knowlton to represent its American presence, an entity named "Citizens for a Free Kuwait" (CFK). The CFK account at Hill & Knowlton was managed by Craig Fuller, Bush's chief of staff during his vice-presidency. The Emir spent about $14 million with Hill & Knowlton on such devices as video news releases that American viewers presumed came from independent journalistic sources. These devices were mainly ruses designed to recruit American taxpayers to support military action against Saddam Hussein. They worked. Meanwhile, President Bush despatched aircraft and 4,000 American combat troops to Saudi Arabia. He made it clear that this was not an invasion of Iraq. The troops were “strictly defensive,” sent to protect Saudi Arabia from an imminent Iraqi invasion. However, King Hussein of Jordan would inform the New York Times that American troops were being deployed to Saudi Arabia long before Saddam moved on Kuwait. [Times, Oct. 16, 1990] Furthermore, King Hussein would say in the same report that he was told by Saudi King Fahd that there was no evidence of a hostile Iraqi build-up on the Saudi border; and that despite American assertions, there was no truth to reports that Iraq planned to invade Saudi Arabia. Fahd’s remark is corroborated by Soviet satellite photographs taken on August 8 which show light sand drifts over patches of roads leading from Kuwait City to the Saudi border – and no evidence of an Iraqi buildup.

Seeing that the United States was interceding to prevent a Muslim solution, Saddam declared the annexation of Kuwait on August 8. This did not mean that Iraq was no longer willing to consider a withdrawal. On the contrary, writes Hugh Roberts, it was Saddam’s way of preserving the issue until the summit could entertain fresh proposals during its August 9-10 meeting in Cairo. But when the summit convened, delegates sat down to find the issue already decided by a “draft resolution” presented by Egypt and Saudi Arabia, written in English and translated into Arabic, and pre-supported by 10 other states, constituting a majority. Iraq was not present. The resolution condemned the Iraqi decision to annex Kuwait, called for the immediate withdrawal of Iraqi troops from Kuwait, affirmed Kuwaiti sovereignty, and agreed to respond positively to the requests of Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states to send Muslim forces to Kuwait’s defense. It was made clear, at the insistence of the Bush administration, that “international law” was going to be enforced on Iraq, despite the fact that international law had not punished many previous acts of aggression by other Muslim states. The draft resolution, obviously prepared by Bush administrators, shattered a once unified Arab world. Hugh Roberts wrote: “The possibility of a peaceful, negotiated, [Muslim] solution to the Gulf crisis was dead, killed by US pressure.” Saddam Hussein’s reaction was to submit proposals on August 12th (and again in December, as reported by Knute Royce in Newsday) for a comprehensive settlement of all outstanding Islamic territorial conflicts according to international law. He proposed that the Muslim states be judged equitably. He was willing to let Iraq’s transgressions be judged by international law if the Muslim leaders who claimed to be upholding it would let their national transgressions be judged by the same standard. Saddam’s proposals were rejected out of hand by the United States. “From that moment on,” according to Hugh Roberts, “the Anglo-American and UN position lacked all legal and moral authority in the eyes of the vast majority of the Arab and Muslim world.” But moral authority in the Arab and Muslim world is not the Bible. A world whose moral authority comes from the Koran (or any other source, for that matter) cannot understand that the Chairman and his American beast, in building "worldwide solidarity" for the better management of evildoing, can lawfully grant special immunities from the rigors of international law to favored subjects, such as other transgressing Muslim leaders who cooperate in the solidarity process. The world is ruled by the Bible, a single infallible standard which provides that evildoers – persons who deny the deity and unique saving power of Christ – are subject to rule by evildoers created and appointed by God. It has been so, I maintain in Rulers of Evil, since Cain. This is the fundamental fact of human life, clearly stated in the Bible: "I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things." (Isaiah 45:7) The American beast and its Vatican mistress are evils created by God out of unregenerate humanity for the purpose of ruling souls that have chosen to be cursed by Him rather than blessed. “I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both you and your seed may live.” (Deuteronomy 30:19) Since only Jesus Christ claims to be "the Life" (John 14:6), one's choosing any other means of delivery from death invites death itself, a process regulated by the rulers of evil. A ruler of evil cannot choose the Life and continue the ruses, deceptions, violence, and betrayal necessary to remain in power. Under the scriptural standard, the "Christians" in world rulership must be followers of what the apostle Paul termed "another Jesus, another gospel," living out their death, doling out benefits and punishments to underlings living out their death. The Life is not prohibited to either, but choosing it requires coming out of Babylon, the angel's metaphor for dying in Christ and enjoying resurrection as a new eternal creature in but not of the world.

On August 12, all shipments of Iraqi oil were stopped by a naval blockade. Three days later, John Paul II commanded that the entire Catholic university system should aim for "a more just sharing in the world's resources, and a new economic and political order that will better serve the human community at a national and international level." (Apostolic Constitution on Catholic Universities, August 15, 1990) Bush administrator Craig Fuller produced a ruse with Hill & Knowlton that motivated Congress to declare war against Iraq. This was the famous "Nayirah" interview. Appearing before the unofficial (but official-sounding) "Congressional Human Rights Caucus" on October 19, the 15-year-old Nayirah al-Sabah testified that while volunteering in the maternity ward of Al Adnan hospital in Kuwait City she had witnessed Iraqi soldiers tearing Kuwaiti infants out of their incubators and throwing them "on the cold floor to die." Frieda Construe-Nag and Myra Ancog Cooke, two maternity nurses in that ward later said that they had never seen Nayirah there and that the baby-dumping had never happened. It was later revealed that "Nayirah" was actually the daughter of Kuwait's ambassador to the US, and that the whole story was invented by a Vassar Phi Beta Kappa member of the Council on Foreign Relations and writer at Hill & Knowlton named Lauri Fitz-Pegado. But President Bush pumped the story six times over the ensuing five weeks, which gave Congress a credible pretext for supporting military actions against Iraq. When the President explained to a joint session of Congress that he only acted to check Saddam's aggression after “120,000 [Iraqi] troops with 850 [Iraqi] tanks had poured into Kuwait and moved south to threaten Saudi Arabia,” Soviet satellite photos showed no sign of any massing along the Kuwait-Saudi border whatsoever. The Pentagon was claiming some 250,000 Iraqi troops were occupying Kuwait, yet refused to show evidence that might contradict these satellite photos. The Soviet photos showed American forces, encampments, aircraft, camouflaged equipment dumps, staging areas and tire-tracks across the desert. Analysts could find nothing like this to indicate an Iraqi presence anywhere in Kuwait. Peter Zimmerman, formerly of the U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency in the Reagan administration, and a former image specialist for the Defense Intelligence Agency, concluded: "We don’t see any tent cities, we don’t see congregations of tanks, we can’t see troop concentrations, and the main Kuwaiti air base appears deserted. It’s five weeks after the invasion, and from what we can see, the Iraqi air force hasn’t flown a single fighter to the most strategic air base in Kuwait. There is no infrastructure to support large numbers of [soldiers]. They have to use toilets, or the functional equivalent. They have to have food. But where is it?" One week later, the Pentagon was issuing reports that Iraqi forces in Kuwait had grown to 360,000 men and 2,800 tanks – yet the satellite photos of southern Kuwait show no evidence of such. Iraqi troops did eventually appear at the Saudi Arabian border, but “they were sent there as a response to a U.S. buildup and were not a provocation for Bush's military action,” reported Brian Becker, an investigator with the Commission of Inquiry for the International War Crimes Tribunal. On December 17, the U.N. set a January 15, 1991 deadline for Iraqi withdrawal from Kuwait. President Bush promised to send Secretary of State James Baker to meet Saddam Hussein before the deadline, but reneged. Saddam rejected January 15 and offered to withdraw by February 15. President Bush ordered American planes to incinerate hundreds of women and children sleeping in the al-Arneriyah bomb shelter, and two days later rejected Saddam’s offer of a February withdrawal. On the 16th of January 1991, the President launched what has been called “the Gulf Massacre,”

in which between 85,000 and 100,000 Iraqis were killed because the United States (a) refused to countenance either a diplomatic or a legal solution to the Gulf crisis, and (b) acted between August 2 and August 10, 1990 to make both solutions impossible. Concludes Hugh Roberts, “The true number of Iraqis who have been slaughtered in the greatest act of western folly and murderous arrogance in living memory may well be very much higher than this, of course.” On February 27th, coalition forces entered Kuwait City, and President Bush declared Kuwait liberated. Less than a week later in Rome, some 15 Catholic leaders from the Middle East, North Africa, Europe and America held a “postwar Gulf summit meeting.” Pope John Paul II addressed the opening of the summit lamenting that the war had only sharpened tensions in the region and “awakened distrust and rancor inherited from the past.” His Holiness denied that any religious war had taken place, yet rebuked Muslim countries that “do not allow Christian [Roman Catholic] communities to take root, celebrate their faith and live it according to the demands of their confession.” Likewise, the summit’s final communique rejected all efforts to cast the war as “a conflict between Islam and Christianity.” Indeed, the war was not a conflict. To the minds of Presidency and Papacy, it was precisely what Bush had prayed for and John Paul II had ordered the year before: the use of power to help people (at the price of much blood) in creating a world event that would reaffirm and recognize the interdependence of humanity. Thanks to the Gulf War, as the summit's final report stated, Catholic believers, for the first time ever, had an agenda to work for secure boundaries for Israel, independence and unity for Lebanon, a homeland and self-determination for the Palestinians, multilateral demilitarization and economic development of the region, and the establishment of Jerusalem as the international “holy city” of Muslims, Christians, and Jews. David Scott opined in the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs that the postwar Gulf summit “may one day be recalled as an historic turning point in the Catholic Church’s involvement in the Middle East.” But the turning point was not the summit, but rather the Gulf War itself, an event created by Presidential deception. Had there been no Gulf War, there would have been no postwar Gulf summit. Significantly, it was on this Vatican summit’s final day, March 6th, that the President delivered a speech before Congress which sounded more like reassuring the Chairman than reporting to the corporate stockholders: “Now, we can see a new world coming into view. A world in which there is the very real prospect of a new world order." In the decade between the Gulf War and 9/11 the United States covertly nurtured a Muslim reaction to America's blasphemous intrusions -- the Koran, after all, permits retaliation: "whoever then acts aggressively against you, inflict injury on him according to the injury he has inflicted on you." (2.194, Shakir translation) This nurturing produced the world's perception of "terrorism" as a product of Islamic fanaticism rather than of American foreign policy. Textbooks in the schools of Afghanistan provided by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) had since the early 1980s been "filled with talk of jihad and featuring drawings of guns, bullets, soldiers and mines." (Washington Post, March 23, 2002) Written at the University of Nebraska, these textbooks reared Afghanistani kids in the retaliatory culture that encouraged (and made plausible the emergence of) personalities like the Afghanistan-trained Ramzi Ahmed Yousef, convicted for the 1993 parking basement bombing at the World Trade Center, and Osama bin Laden -- the man who would destroy America. To anyone who has seriously studied how vigorously the Commander-in-Chief and his Vice-President have avoided apprehending bin Laden, and have obstructed, if not overcome, all attempts to conduct routine forensic examinations of "ground zero," the Pentagon strike zone, and the Pennsylvania debris field, all of which would almost certainly prove false the official version of that morning's events, 9/11 could only have been a ruse created by the American Presidency to furnish a pretext for restricting the rights and property of Americans in order to

redistribute American funds and forces to the middle east and soon elsewhere, pursuant to the Papacy's design for "international interdependence." I place no blame here on anyone. The Papacy and the American Presidency are appointed by God to regulate evildoers by all necessary means. This they're doing well -- "using power to help people" -- and are enjoying rich worldly rewards for their deceptive and often brutal services. But their eternal future is in dire jeopardy, a fact dimmed by the ecstasy of power. When a self-aware evildoer is led to stop evildoing, he is being drawn inexorably by God out of the jurisdiction of the rulers of evil. This is "coming out of Babylon," and it's not easy. It's as hard on the body as stopping smoking, drugs, or toxic diets. How to leave the addiction of Babylon is not taught in any religious institution that I know of, Christian or otherwise. One learns only from humbly reading the Bible, with the assistance of the Holy Spirit and others who have come out. Persons who help others wanting to come out of Babylon are called "ministers of reconciliation." Reconciliators don't condemn evildoers or their rulers. They don't evangelize for a particular church or sect. They only facilitate citizenship in the safest, best-protected government on earth, Jesus Christ. ========================================= Vatican Power, Witchcraft And Top US Officials US High-Level Officials Are Only Subservient Vassals For Vatican Power and Witchcraft By Greg Szymanski Arctic Beacon.com 11-9-6 Although Americans are hoping the recent mid-term elections provided a glimmer of hope, it should be understood that the U.S. is really only a subservient vassal under the immense control of Vatican witchcraft and power. For example, five of the eight U.S. Supreme Court Justices are Roman Catholic with their first allegiance to the Pope and his fascist agenda, not America. Besides the corrupted judiciary, the U.S. is being used to subdue and destroy the Middle East for the Vatican, as many of America's top military leaders are Roman Catholics with their first allegiance to Rome, not America. In fact every major political appointment made by the illegal occupant of the White House and Luciferian Skull and Bonesman, George W. Bush, has been consistently Roman Catholic. Listen to a Vatican researcher who connects the dots among the Illuminati, the Bush administration and the Vatican, all trying to destroy America silently from within with lies and deceptions: "Examples include Opus Dei John Roberts, Samuel Alito appointed to the Roman Rota of the U.S. empire- the U.S. Supreme Court, Gen. Peter Pace (Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff), Michael Peter Jackson to the SS of the American Reich the Department of Homeland (Romeland) Security, Alberto Gonzales to the post of U.S. Attorney General and many, many more. "Honorary Shriner and Knight of Malta former President Ronald Reagan's administration was the most Roman Catholic but I think the Bush administration now holds that record. Former CIA director Knight of Malta George J. Tenet, Jesuit-trained at the Walsh School of Foreign Service was rewarded for his bold act of high treason with a professorship at his alma mater. Former CIA

director Skull and Bonesman, Porter Goss, will be rewarded for his secretive actions. I wouldn't surprised if Georgetown or Fordham soon gives him a professorship. "The fact that the Bush Administration is predominately Roman Catholic might be an indication that a concordat with the Unholy See was secretly signed during one of Bush's audiences with Papal Antichrist JPII. I don't know for sure. "Recently, Luciferian Emperor Bush said that his brother Jeb became a Third Degree Knight of Columbus. And 33rd Degree Freemason, Southern Baptist devotee of the pagan goddess Gaia Al Gore is also one of them. "It doesn't matter who the Archbishop of New York selects the same wicked Jesuit agenda will be served by his puppet in the White House who is nothing more than a slave to the Jesuits of Georgetown University, his local boss Theodore Cardinal McCarrick who was trained by Jesuits at Fordham and ordained to the Romanist priesthood by Francis Cardinal Spellman in 1958 and his national political boss Jesuit-trained Edward Cardinal Egan." There of course would be no problem with Catholics involved in government if history hasn't already proved that the Vatican and Jesuit Order's intentions have always been to destroy freedom, not advance it. Here again listen to a Jesuit and Vatican researcher connect the dots between high military leaders trained at Jesuit-Georgetown and connected to the Knights of Malta, a powerful organization in America fronting Vatican power and dominance over U.S. foreeigh and domestic policy. "According to a February 2006 speech by Georgetown president Jesuit-trained Knight of Malta and CFR member John "Jack" J. DeGioia USMC Gen. Peter Pace Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff successor of CFR member Richard Myers is a Georgetown alum having been "a member of the School of Foreign Service's Leadership Seminar 14 years ago. "He has also come back several times to speak to current seminars as an alumnus, and has publicly lauded the program for the manner it enables connections and friendships to be made around the globe." and was awarded the President's Medal (of Georgetown University Other recipients of this award include according to DeGioia, "It has been presented to heads of state during their visits to campus, as well as three guests this evening: President Aznar, [SMOM] Secretary Nicholson in his previous role as Ambassador to the Holy See, and [Jesuit-trained] Senator Leahy. I take great pride in adding General Peter Pace, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, to that distinguished list. General Pace, please step forward. "SMOM DeGioia said, 'Our motto here at Georgetown is "Utraque Unum" or, "Both and One." It is often used to ensure we look at two sides of things-so it can sometimes refer to art and science, sometimes to body and soul, sometimes to mind and spirit. The motto of the Marine Corps is another Latin phrase: "Semper Fidelis" or, "Always Faithful. 'Would you please all join me in a two-part toast? First, to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Pete Pace. His "always faithful" service, integrity and loyalty as a joint officer and a Marine, as a scholar and a warrior, and as an officer and a gentleman are an inspiration to leaders everywhere. And second, to his wonderful wife, Lynne. Her care and mentorship of others at the USO, with at American With Disabilities, at overseas orphanages, and at so many other places of need show that her inner core values are easily the equal of any Marine, and of any Jesuit.' According to another recent article, Gen. Pace in his speech to the John Carroll Society said "I stand before you as someone who is appreciative... who truly does believe this award is in

anticipation of future conduct," Pace said. And the Vatican researcher wondered after hearing this speech: "Could the true meaning of this quote be that the future betrayal of U.S. troops in the Middle East is anticipated by Jesuit-trained Pace and his masters-the Jesuits of Georgetown? I think so. He is being rewarded for his obedience to the Order and his future complicity in the destruction of the U.S. Armed Forces most of whom unknowingly serve the Papacy. "I honestly believe Jesuit-trained Pace, NATO Supreme Commander James L. Jones, George Casey Jr., Georgetown Law dropout Donald Rumsfeld and CFR member John Abizaid will very soon at the command of their Jesuit masters and their Council on Foreign Relations betray U.S. troops in the Middle East. The Jesuit connection to this war of annihilation against the Muslim peoples and at the same time U.S. soldiers most of whom are unaware that they are cannon fodder for a Jesuit-led Papal Crusade is unmistakable. It is no coincidence that these are connected to Georgetown University, Opus Dei, and the Council on Foreign Relations. "I suspect Pace is also a member of Opus Dei given his connection to Jesuit-trained Romanist priest Peter Vaghi of the Church of the Little Flower and chaplain of the John Carroll Society of which Peter Pace, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court John Roberts who has ties to Jesuit Georgetown having been an Adjunct Professor in London, Jesuit-trained Supreme Court Justice and Opus Dei member Antonin Scalia are members." http://www.johncarrollsociety.org/new_page_7.htm To illustrate how President Reagan sold out his country by re-establishing diplomatic relations with the Vatican, read this portion of Chapter 1. Subliminal Rome, from Tupper Saussy's book, Rulers of Evil. When a Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter announced in his 1992 Time Magazine cover story that a "conspiracy" binding President Ronald Reagan and Pope John Paul II into a "secret, holy alliance" had brought about the demise of communism, at least one reader saw through the hype. Professor Carol A. Brown of the University of Massachusetts fired off a letter to Time's editors saying, Last week I taught my students about the separation of church and state. This week I learned that the Pope is running U.S. foreign policy. No wonder our young people are cynical about American ideals. What Brown had learned from Carl Bernstein I had discovered for myself over several years of private investigation: the papacy really does run United States foreign policy, and always has. Yes, Bernstein noted that the leading American players behind the Reagan/Vatican conspiracy, to a man, were "devout Roman Catholics" namely, William Casey (Director, CIA), Richard Allen (National Security Advisor), Judge William Clark (National Security Advisor), Alexander Haig (Secretary of State), Vernon Walters (Ambassador-at-Large), and William Wilson (Ambassador to the Vatican State). But the reporter neglected to mention that the entire Senate Foreign Relations committee was governed by Roman Catholics, as well. Specifically, Senators Joseph Biden (Subcommittee on European Affairs), Paul Sarbanes (International Economic Policy, Trade, Oceans, and Environment), Daniel P. Moynihan (Near Eastern and South Asian Affairs), John Kerry (Terrorism, Narcotics, and International Communications) and Christopher Dodd (Western Hemi-sphere and Peace Corps Affairs).

Bernstein would have been wandering off-point to list the Roman Catholic leaders of American domestic policy, such as Senate majority leader George Mitchell and Speaker of the House Tom Foley. In fact, when the holy alliance story hit the stands, there was virtually no arena of federal legislative activity, according to The 1992 World Almanac of US Politics, that was not directly controlled by a Roman Catholic senator or representative. The committees and subcommittees of the United States Senate and House of Representatives governing commerce, communications and telecommunications, energy, medicine, health, education and welfare, human services, consumer protection, finance and financial institutions, transportation, labor and unemployment, hazardous materials, taxation, bank regulation, currency and monetary policy, oversight of the Federal Reserve System, commodity prices, rents services, small business administration, urban affairs, European affairs, Near Eastern & South Asian affairs, terrorism/narcotics/ international communications, international economic/trade/ oceans/environmental policy, insurance, housing, community development, federal loan guarantees, economic stabilization measures (including wage and price controls), gold and precious metals transactions, agriculture, animal and forestry industries, rural issues, nutrition, price supports, Food for Peace, agricultural exports, soil conservation, irrigation, stream channelization, floodcontrol, minority enterprise, environment and pollution, appropriations, defense, foreign operations, vaccines, drug labeling and packaging, drug and alcohol abuse, inspection and certification of fish and processed food, use of vitamins and saccharin, national health insurance proposals, human services, legal services, family relations, the arts and humanities, the handicapped, and aging in other words, virtually every aspect of secular life in America came under the chairmanship of one of these Roman Catholic laypersons: Frank Annunzio Joseph Biden Silvio Conte Kika De la Garza John Dingell Christopher Dodd Vic Fazio James Florio Henry Gonzalez Thomas Harkin Edward Kennedy John Kerry John LaFalce Patrick Leahy Charles Luken Edward Madigan Edward Markey Joseph McDade Barbara Mikulski George Miller Daniel Moynihan John Murtha Mary Rose Oakar David Obey Claiborne Pell Charles Rangel Dan Rostenkowski or Edward Roybal. Vatican Council II's Constitution on the Church (1964) instructs politicians to use their secular offices to advance the cause of Roman Catholicism. Catholic laypersons, "whoever they are, are called upon to expend all their energy for the growth of the Church and its continuous sanctification," and "to make the Church present and operative in those places and circumstances where only through them can it become the salt of the earth" (iv, 33). Vatican II further instructs all Catholics "by their competence in secular disciplines and by their activity [to] vigorously contribute their effort so that the goods of this world may be more equitably distributed among all men, and may in their own way be conducive to universal progress in human and Christian freedom and [to] remedy the customs and conditions of the world, if they are an inducement to sin, so that they all may be conformed to the norms of justice and may favor the practice of virtue rather than hinder it" (iv, 36). Vatican II affirms Catholic doctrine dating back to 1302, 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." 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 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 silverand- 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. Today's Pontifex Maximus is Pope John Paul II. As we shall discover in a forthcoming chapter, 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. I shall present evidence that the House fasces represent the Black Pope, who indeed rules the world. Later, I will develop what is sure to become a controversial hypothesis: that the Black Pope rules by divine appointment, and for the ultimate good of mankind. For more informative articles, go to www.arcticbeacon.com -- The arctic beacon is asking for your support. Please go to www.arcticbeacon.com and contribute by credit card or paypal as it is the only way the truth can be told. Thank you.Greg is regular on Rense Radio the first Thursday of every month at 9pm pacific time. And Greg has his own daily show on the Genesis Communication Network. Go to www.gcnlive.com NOTICE: Due to Presidential Executive Orders, the National Security Agency may have read this email without warning, warrant, or notice, and certainly without probable cause. They may do this without any judicial or legislative oversight. You have no recourse or protection other than petitioning your elected officials and exercising all of your constitutional rights. ------------======================================== Chamish - The Vatican's Plot Against Israel By Barry Chamish <[email protected]> 1-16-01 In March 1994, the newspaper Chadashot revealed a most remarkable secret of the Middle East "peace" process. A friend of Shimon Peres, the French intellectual Marek Halter, claimed in an interview that in May 1993, he delivered a letter from Peres to the pope. Within, Peres promised to internationalize Jerusalem, granting the UN political control of the Old City of Jerusalem, and the Vatican hegemony of the holy sites within. The UN would give the PLO a capital within its new territory and East Jerusalem would become a kind of free trade zone of world diplomacy. Halter's claim was backed by the Italian newspaper La Stampa which added that Arafat was apprised of the agreement and it was included in the secret clauses of the Declaration Of Principles signed in Washington in September 1993. In March 1995, the Israeli radio station Arutz Sheva was leaked a cable from the Israeli Embassy in Rome to Peres's Foreign Ministry in Jerusalem confirming the handover of Jerusalem to the Vatican. This cable was printed on the front page of the radical leftwing Israeli newspaper, Haaretz two days later. A scandal erupted and numerous rabbis who had invited Peres for Passover services cancelled their invitations in protest of his treachery. Peres reacted by claiming that the cable was real but that someone had whited out the word, "not;" the cable really said that Israel would "not" hand Jerusalem over to the holy pontiff. Illustrating the sorry political state of Israel's rabbis, they accepted this cockamamie excuse and re-invited Peres to their tables. However, in the widely distributed minutes of a meeting with Clinton in 1997, Peres reiterated his diplomacy, ending with the words, "as I had previously promised the Holy See."

Peres's partner in crime, and the real founder of the Oslo Accord, Yossi Beilin, coordinated his PLO policy with the Vatican. Check the timing; at the same moment that he was finagling an accord with the PLO, he was negotiating an agreement for Vatican recognition of Israel. His deal with the pope became another brief scandal when politicians like Agudat Yisrael head Avraham Shapira and Jerusalem Deputy Mayor, Shmuel Meir were leaked hidden details of Beilin's accord which included, "the extra-territoriality of holy sites in Jerusalem to be transferred to Vatican control." Later, Shapira was neutralized by having $250 million is debts accrued by his crooked carpet factory forgiven, while Meir was permanently hushed when his car was crushed by a UN truck driven by a PLO driver. The driver, of course, was released forever after being briefly questioned by Israel Police. Now let us jump to the present. The current Foreign Minister Shlomo Ben Ami is shuttling between King Carlos of Spain and the Vatican. That is where the action is for the Israeli government today, and when things get serious, the focus shifts to Paris where Chirac, Albright and Arafat await him. There is no question whatsoever that the Vatican wants Israel off the Temple Mount and that our leadership is accommodating their desire. What I have not been able to pinpoint is why. However, material sent to me appears to answer the question. Allow me to preface a few comments before I carry on. The vast majority of my ongoing readers are not really conspiratorial in their outlook. What attracted them to my e-mail list and books is that I solved the Rabin assassination to their satisfaction and that I am offering more likely explanations for Israel's suicide than they are getting from the mainstream media. It took five years for me to finally instill the fact that the Council On Foreign Relations (CFR) in New York is Israel's number one enemy, and despite pouring on the evidence time after time, there are still doubters who refuse to believe that any organization can have that much power. Every time I dig deep, I'm accused of going too far, even of fantasizing imaginary foes. So what am I going to do with the evidence sent to me accusing the Society Of Jesus, whose members are known as Jesuits, of being the real power behind the CFR and of being Israel and Judaism's most vicious and successful enemy? My doubters are going to have a field day with this revelation but I'm going ahead anyway. The weight of the evidence is beyond merely compelling. I had known for some time that a former Jesuit priest, Malachi Martin had exposed his society's treachery at great length. Numerous correspondents insisted I could not understand Israel's dilemma without reading Martin's revelations. Still, one voice wasn't enough for me to risk unnecessary mockery. However, recently other voices have been added to Martin's and I've started paying attention. A composer who I had greatly admired thirty years ago, Tupper Saussy released a book called Rulers Of Evil, which expanded on the thesis of Jesuit control of the American political system and is receiving fine reviews. We have begun a correspondence and I will receive his book shortly. In the meantime, allow me to expand on the book I completed reading yesterday. It is called Vatican Assassins and the author is Eric Jon Phelps. One may read excerpts by visiting www.vaticanassassins.org. This was no ordinary reading experience, the manuscript I received spiral bound is 750 pages in length. The first 600 pages attempt, mostly successfully, to prove that the Jesuits were formed in reaction to the Protestant Reformation and their goal is to return the planet to the good old days when one pope held the monopoly on world religion. Utilizing any evil means available, their plan is to eliminate all the competition be they Jews, Muslims of Christians who don't recognize the Vatican as their capital. It is their war on the Jews which will most interest my readers and from here on, we will concentrate on that one aspect of a most complicated history.

I will start with the book's claim that Jesuit control of Great Britain was the real force behind Zionism and the re-establishment of a Jewish homeland in Israel. I have no problem with this thesis since the entire Middle East as it exists today, was created by the British during and after the first World War. If the British created Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Iraq, Lebanon etc., one can be very certain they created modern Israel as well. The most disturbing charge is that, to populate the new Israel, the Jesuits stirred up the pogroms and Holocaust of Europe to drive Jews to their safe haven in the Middle East. On page 548 we read: "Hitler, now in power, patterned his SS after the Jesuit Order. He used Roman Catholic Bavarian Himmler with his Jesuit uncle to carry out the plan. Hitler declares: 'I have learnt most of all from the Jesuit Order. A good part of that organization I have transported direct to my own party. I will tell you a secret, I am founding an Order. In Himmler I see our Ignatius de Loyola.' "Walter Shellenberg, Chief of the Nazi Sicherheitsdienst (SD) reveals: ' The SS had been organized by Himmler according to the principles of the Jesuit Order. The rules of service and spiritual exercises prescribed by Ignatius de Loyola constituted a model which Hitler strove carefully to copy.' " Edmund Paris then asks this most penetrating question concerning Hitler: ' Was it not his uncle, the Jesuit father, who had been promoted to a high-ranking officer of the SS? And was not the latter the very eye and arm of Halke von Ledochowski, General of the Order? Who then was sending so many million deportees to death? Was it Heinrich Himmler or his uncle, the Jesuit canon?'" The book details the betrayal of Israel's leadership during the Holocaust, recalling that Rudolph Kastner, "then one of Israel's most honored leaders, was a traitor who had cooperated with the Nazi leaders of Germany including Adolph Eichmann to deport Jews from Hungary." I don't dispute this claim and anyone who does should read Ben Hecht's, Perfidy or The Transfer Agreement by Edwin Black. It is the conclusion drawn from this treason, on page 584, which is far more troublesome: "Ah, dear truth seeker, Zionist Israel is a creation of the Jesuit Order. Its purpose is to secure Jerusalem for the Jesuits "infallible" Pope, that he may receive worldwide worship from Solomon's rebuilt Temple. If the Masonic Zionists betrayed their own Jewish race into Pius XII's concentration camps overseen by the Jesuit Order, would they not betray the nation of Israel by giving Jerusalem to the Pope in preparation for the rebuilding of Solomon's Temple? "...Therefore we are living under the preeminence of a Gentile Jesuit conspiracy. It employs notorious Masonic Jews and Gentiles as their agents. This furthers the deception of an international Jewish conspiracy oppressing the nations. Using this lie, the Jesuit General in creating global, anti-Jewish fury again. This fury will culminate in the last mad attempt to invade Israel and destroy the physical descendants of Jacob." And who is leading the invasion? We learn that Bill Clinton was the student president of the Jesuit's Georgetown University and, for a time, expressed the desire of becoming a Jesuit priest. In those days, Clinton was sent to England on a Rhodes scholarship, with all that that implies, and at an anti-American demonstration met Jesuit Friar Richard McSorely, who later headed Georgetown's Center For Peace Studies. On page 672, we get a haunting hint at Clinton's later role in Israel's destruction, as well as those of Norway and France:

"McSorley then went to France and Scandinavia to meet peace people. Stepping off the train right behind him in Oslo, Norway was Bill Clinton." And if a Clinton Democrat fails to ignite the flames that will engulf Israel, the Jesuits, "will use the Republican Party to bring a Jesuit-controlled, Jew-hating fascist dictator to power, 'For the greater glory of the god who sits in St. Peter's chair.'" That's Eric Jon Phelps explanation why Israel's political leaders, especially those of the Labor Party, are running between, Chirac, King Carlos and the Vatican to secure a "peace" treaty with the PLO. I can only advise my readers not to dismiss the possibility that he got it right. *** A note from Barry - I am planning an American tour in March. So far I have received invitations from Colorado and Texas. If your organization, place of worship, cultural center etc. would like to hear my lecture, Who Murdered Yitzhak Rabin, please contact me by e-mail. The second edition of Who Murdered Yitzhak Rabin is doing very well, thanks in large part to its weekly serialization in New York's widely read newspaper, The Jewish Press. To acquire a copy, write the publisher at [email protected] or in the US call 1 800 666BOOK. In Israel, write [email protected] or call 02 6712284 for this book and the following. THE LAST DAYS OF ISRAEL, by Barry Chamish, ISBN 1893302164 - $16.95, is now available: Internet: at www.bn.com Soon on line at www.amazon.com , and other online bookstores... and at your favorite physical bookstore(s). Listed in Books in Print under title, author, Dandelion Books, publisher and ISBN number. Distributed by Ingram (US) and Bartram (UK). THIS BOOK IS A MUST READ. WE URGE YOU TO TAKE TIME TO ENTER A REVIEW IN THE ON LINE BOOKSTORES. Look for the cover picture soon in the bn.com listing. Sorry it's not there yet. We're getting there...putting the industry to the test as pioneers in Internet print-on-demand in the New Age of digital book production and delivery! Thank you in advance for your orders -- Carol Adler President, Dandelion Books http://www.dandelion books.com/www.dandelionbooks.com Voice - 480-897-4452 Fax - 480-897-4453 5250 South Hardy Drive - Ste. 3067 Tempe, Arizona 85283 USA ====================================== The Overthrow Of The American Republic - Part 1 By Sherman H. Skolnick

[email protected] http://www.skolnicksreport.com 9-23-1 Starting after the multiple bombings of the Federal office building in Oklahoma City, April 19, 1995, I wrote and then spoke on talk radio about an aborted military coup. Brought home to me, however, was the reality that my fellow Americans had little knowledge or understanding of the masterstroke, the overthrow of government, whether for the good or for evil. In the past, had we as Americans been clearly informed by the popular press of a putsch, the overthrow of government by violence, by political assassination, such as to benefit domestic or foreign powers? After all, who benefitted from the political assassination of President Abraham Lincoln if not the British and the French who held the means to swoop upon us at the time from their entrenched positions to the south and north of us, in Canada and Mexico. The British wanted to split apart the nation by aggravating the natural friction between the ideas of the North and the South in America. The French were ready to carve up America as well. Since at least the War of 1812, the British had plotted to take back this continent as a puppet colony with so-called "Americans" again as subjects of the British Crown. [To their credit, Czarist Russia at the time of the War Between The States, or as called, the American Civil War, attempted to aid Lincoln with the Czar's naval fleet coming right offshore the U.S.] Look what happened in the decades after the murder of Lincoln. President James Garfield was against the British controlling the growing financial power of the U.S. President William McKinley [the Brits hate the Irish] opposed the British trying to strangle the rise of American industrial power. Their political assassination in the years after that of Lincoln, in its simplest explanation, benefitted British attempts to grab back America. Seldom, if ever, are these events explained in this way. The Clinton White House with prior knowledge, allowed the Oklahoma bombings to occur, to restore his power following the debacle of the 1994 Congressional elections putting a GOP majority to confront him in Congress. And, with Clinton as a marionette, it aided the Establishment in their continuing propaganda to make common Americans helpless to oppose tyranny by disarming them. Two days before the Oklahoma bloodshed, on April 17, 1995, a plane-load of top military brass were murdered when their sabotaged plane blew up near Alexander City, Alabama. It was a real life version of "Seven Days in May". According to federal grand jurors we interviewed, there was an attempt, later blocked, by a grand jury to investigate this aborted coup. It was actually part of a series of events involving twenty four Admirals and Generals, some of the most patriotic flag officers in the history of this Republic. They vowed, under the Uniform Military Code, to arrest their Commander-in-Chief Bill Clinton, for his various acts of treason aiding and abetting sworn enemies of the United States, such as Red China and Iraq. If Clinton had them arrested for mutiny, they were prepared, if not assassinated, to defend themselves with their heavily documented charges of his treachery against the U.S. Constitution and the people of the United States. Some of the coup plotters, deciding to be out of uniform, took up residence in a Paris suburb. The French CIA, aware of all this, used it to blackmail advantages out of the U.S. government. Such as, to blockade the U.S. Justice Department, itself a highly corrupt entity, from prosecuting some fourteen French nationals, resident in the U.S., who stole U.S. industrial and financial secrets. [The French used similar blackmail threatening to publicize their knowledge of Iran's complicity in the missile attack on TWA Flight 800. Eight top officials of the French CIA along with some 60 other French nationals died in the plane that had been scheduled for Paris. A top official, however, of the French CIA at the last minute refused to board Flight 800. The Clinton White House had a secret business/peace deal pending with the Teheran oligarchs which the missile

disclosures would have wrecked.] The purpose of several attempts to pull off a coup was NOT to install a junta [pronounced HOON-tah], that is, an evil military dictatorship. Rather, to restore by necessary force the American Republic, which has gone down hill since the overthrow, by the American secret political police, of the U.S. government, by way of the murder in 1963 of President John F. Kennedy. In the months and years that followed the Alexander City incident, some ten like-minded Admirals, Generals, and other officials and former officials, were assassinated. Such as, Admiral Jeremy Boorda, Chief of Naval Operations, the highest naval officer in uniform. Such as General David McCloud, head of the Alaska Military District. Such as, former Director of Central Intelligence, DCI, William Colby. Our interviews with their family members, relatives, and confidants convinces us of the validity of our reports. The monopoly press wrote off their demise as "airplane accidents", "suicide", and "boat accident". Some of those hearing me on the radio, wrote to me. I could see immediately they had no understanding of the subject. One letter stated simply, "Mr. Skolnick, send me your papers on the koo [sic]." Evidently, this subject is not in the usual U.S. history text books in the usual high schools and colleges. [As to the Iraqi connection, visit our website stories. Such as "U.S. Government Prior Knowledge of Emergency", "The Secrets of Timothy McVeigh".] Because of my analyses of the current emergency, I should, I suppose, expect to be heckled and reviled by some well-meaning but poorly- informed fellow Americans. Notwithstanding the pronouncements of the American secret political police, the FBI and CIA, and the oil-soaked, spy-riddled monopoly press, and the White House, the plot to destroy the American republic is entirely based WITHIN THIS NATION. It is obviously good and proper to respect the U.S. flag, perpetuated with the blood of American heroes. On the other hand, it can be a fatal mistake, a nuking of the Bill of Rights, not to recognize scoundrels who wrap themselves in the same flag to cover up their crimes against the American common people. In its simplest form, the Persian Gulf War was just the falling out of former private business partners. I was the only journalist to be in attendance in 1991, at the hearing of a federal court case in Chicago. My exclusive interviews of the participants confirmed why certain bank records had to be concealed, the subject matter of the litigation. They showed the secret private business partnership in the 1980s of George Herbert Walker Bush, President in 1991, and Saddam Hussein, the Iraqi strongman installed by Bush, starting when Bush was head of the secret police in 1976. [My exclusive highly detailed story ran in a populist newspaper, "Spotlight", August 19, 1991.] Profoundly corrupt Chicago federal appeals judges put the case out of court and the file has been scattered to the wind. We apparently are the only ones still having the court file. [Visit our website story, "The Secrets of Timothy McVeigh", for the name and number of the case and details of the judges.] The Elder Bush during the Gulf War, wanted the American public to falsely believe that putting the head of Saddam Hussein on a platter and delivering it to the White House, would cure every domestic and foreign problem of the U.S. On July 17, 1993, Saddam Hussein murdered some ten of his top military officers who were plotting, he said, to overthrow him. The Clinton White House, with Bill Clinton as a Bush Family crony, had apparently committed treachery in leaking CIA details to Saddam of the plot against him. Working on investigating both Clinton and Bush as to this treasonous leak, was FBI Director William Sessions who was unceremoniously sacked on frivolous charges two days later, all to protect the treachery from being disclosed of Bush/Clinton.

The very next day, Vincent W. Foster, Jr., Clinton White House Deputy Counsel, who also knew what had happened, was assassinated and clumsily disguised as a "suicide". The aborted plot against Saddam did not become even a watered down version of what happened, in the U.S. monopoly press, until November 1, 1993. [See, "U.S. Accused of Betraying Plot To Kill Iraq's Hussein", Chicago Tribune, 11/1/93.] In 1991, the Elder Bush, as President, put some half a million Americans in harm's way, by way of Bush instigating a fight over Gulf oil properties with his former business partner, Saddam Hussein. Together, in the 1980s, as known to the participants in the lawsuit mentioned, Saddam and Bush, as business partners, split billions of dollars extorted from the oil-soaked weak sheikdoms of the Persian Gulf. The same as done by gangsters who would extract "protection money" from shopkeepers and tax-cheating auto dealers. As a sizeable stockholder of a unit of a French firm, American LaFarge, the Elder Bush was implicated in reportedly supplying the ingredients for poison gas to be manufactured by Iraq, to be used against Iraq's domestic dissidents, namely, the Kurds, as well as against the Iranians, during the Iran-Iraq War, 1980 to 1988. A Director of American LaFarge, naturally, was Hillary Rodham Clinton, wife of the Bush Family pal. Ten years after 1991, the Elder Bush's son, as "resident" and "occupant" of the White House, installed under highly suspect means, is going to war AGAINST HIS reputed former business partner, Osama bin Laden. Like father, like son. George W. Bush's business partner has been a Houston, Texas businessman, James R. Bath. Together, they owned an oil drilling company, Arbusto Energy. [The son, like his father, likes to name his businesses with Spanish names. The Elder Bush named his firm Zapata Petroleum, later, Zapata Offshore, with 600 units worldwide as outposts for the American CIA, starting as early as 1959. The younger Bush's Arbusto is Spanish for "Bush".] By and through James R. Bath, George W. Bush has been a business partner, in the tens of millions of dollars, with Osama bin Laden and his father. As an example, Bath had many millions of dollars of dealings with the Elder bin Laden who was part of the infamous spy/assassination/money laundry scandal of Bank of Credit and Commerce International, BCCI. See the details in "The Outlaw Bank---A Wild Ride Into The Secret Heart of BCCI", by Jonathan Beaty and S.C. Gwynne, Random House, New York, 1993, pages 227-230. Notice in our prior story about the Emergency, the details of Osama bin Laden's secret joint accounts (stemming from the George W. Bush/James R. Bath/bin Laden business partnerships) in the Harris Bank, a unit of Bank of Montreal, owned largely by the Bronfman Family, who have been the owners of the Seagrams booze cartel, and another major owner of the bank being U.S. Senator Peter Fitzgerald (R., Ill.). The U.S. units of Barclays Bank, United Kingdom, have also sought to conceal such reputed joint accounts of Osama bin Laden/James R. Bath/George W. Bush. Who can believe the White House when they say they would freeze Osama bin Laden's accounts if they can find them? Also please notice, in my exclusive story about the Elder Bush/Saddam Hussein business partnership, the banks involved were Banca Nazionale del Lavoro, BNL, owned in part by the Vatican, and its bank twin, BCCI. [My exclusive story in the "Spotlight", 8/19/91.] So, father and son, ten years apart, George Herbert Walker Bush amd George W. Bush, went to war or are going to war against their former business partners. Throughout history, regimes have created an "enemy", as a straw man, and then sent their armies to fight their "enemy". This by way of consolidating their power and diverting attention from their domestic problems, and repressing the poorly informed populace. From the sarcastic standpoint of those who rule us WITHOUT OUR CONSENT, in violation of the U.S. Constitution, America is becoming too populated for there to be supposedly guaranteed

rights. Remember, the Bill of Rights is heavily packed with the word NO. It is a shield against a tyrannical central government. At the hands, however, of a corrupt and venal federal judiciary and a treasonous central government, and a bought off and blackmailed Congress, the Bill of Rights is a worthless, useless piece of paper. The cowardly mass media are mere scriveners, writing down what they are dictated. Under the disguise of leading a religious "crusade" against the Moslem world, every utterance dripping with the word "terrorist", are the ruling elites in the process of overthrowing the American Republic? Who all benefitted from treasonous prior knowledge of the violence against America on September 11, 2001? Are some flag officers in the U.S. military, with full knowledge of all this, opposed to going to a war instigated by the highest circles WITHIN THE UNITED STATES? More coming. Stay tuned. ==================================================== Since 1958, Mr. Skolnick has been a court-reformer, and since 1963, Founder/Chairman, Citizen's Committee To Clean Up the Courts. Since 1991, a regular panelist and since 1995, Moderator/Producer of a one-hour, weekly, public access Cable TV program, "Broadsides", cablecast within Chicago to upwards of 400,000 viewers each Monday evening, 9 p.m., Channel 21 Cable TV. For a heavy packet of our printed stories, send $5.00 [U.S. funds] and a stamped, self-addressed BUSINESS size envelope [#10 envelope, 4-1/8 x 9-1/2] WITH THREE STAMPS ON IT, to Citizen's Committee to Clean up the Courts Sherman H. Skolnick, Chairman, 9800 So. Oglesby Ave., Chicago IL 60617-4870. Office, 8 a.m. to midnight, most 7 days BUT DO NOT BOMBASRD THIS LISTED PHONE WITH "JUST ROUTINE" CALLS- (773) 375-5741. For a recorded message update, a regular phone call, not expensive, (773) 731-1100. WEB-SITE: http://www.skolnicksreport.com [NOTE "s" after NAME IN WEBSITE.] E-MAIL: [email protected] The Overthrow Of The American Republic, Part 2 Commentary By Sherman H. Skolnick [email protected] http://www.skolnicksreport.com 10-9-1 Let a candid and vigilant populace consider my pleas and contentions. We ordinary Americans are being led, step by step, down the road to a dictatorship more evil and all-pervasive than that of the late Adolph Hitler and the Nazi Party of the German aristocracy. The high-level treason that afflicts us cannot be cured or delayed by the alleged "U.S. Government" as now constituted. Within our borders, traitors to the U.S. Constitution and to the Bill of Rights, and to the American common people, cannot be prosecuted. Without the consent of us, the governed, they are in charge, have been in charge, and will remain in charge, to the bitter

collapse of our organic law. With complete impunity, they turn over our most profound industrial, financial, and MILITARY secrets, to sworn enemies of the United States of America, such as to Red China and Iraq [the Bush Family and Bill Clinton have done that]. It is a dire reality that my well-meaning country-men must now ponder and understand, or fail to do so at their peril. The overthrow of the American Republic began at least at the time of the political assassination of John F. Kennedy. In violation of their own rules and procedures, the U.S. Secret Service, on behalf of the ruling plutocrats, utterly refused, failed, and neglected to protect Kennedy as President. They knowingly took him in an open car around a hair-pin turn into the target sights of paid assassins, firing by military-style triangulation. No Secret Service agent, contrary to their rules, was there on foot, on duty, to examine and monitor the dangerous slowing down of the Presidential vehicle. With flimsy excuses, several reputedly venal and for-sale reporters were right there, available in the murder zone, to be later rewarded for false reports, opening the way for their promotion to highly-lucrative TV network status, such as Dan Rather, later CBS Network anchor face, and Robert MacNeil, later PBS co-anchor and co-owner of his own network program with Jim Lehrer. Rather was standing in the shadows of the triple underpass bridge, a few feet from one of the concealed shooters. Rather was the only one on the planet to be able to verify that JFK had been mortally wounded as the Presidential motorcade passed right under Rather's view. MacNeil was in the Book Depository Building and was in a position to see Lee Harvey Oswald and give false data. [According to an FBI document of 11/29/63, the Elder Bush, already then in the CIA, was part of an apparent cover up of the assassination of JFK.] If they survived, there were numerous eyewitnesses and reliable sources that could have contradicted the false declarations of reporters such as Dan Rather and Robert MacNeil, on behalf of the ruling elite, that a "lone assassin" murdered our President. In the wake of the bloody deed in Dallas, November 22, 1963, some 200 eyewitnesses and sources were themselves murdered, snuffing out their possible testimony, their demise a horror-filled death warrant warning to others available to testify. On behalf of the growing American dictatorship of almost near faceless satraps, a five-person tyranny of the U.S. Supreme Court, sitting as if a junta, with serious conflicts of interest, installed George W. Bush as the "occupant" and "resident" of the American White House. This done, contrary to basic case law precedents and in violation of the Bill of Rights, it being a near-midnight-deadline ancient-style edict, "obey our command or be banished from the kingdom". So even if the complicit members of the American aristocracy were somehow to be apprehended, which historically is highly doubtful, they would suffer no punishment. The federal prosecutors are selected on the basis of being blackmailable and with the implicit understanding that they would go against primarily small fish, no one of any great importance. Even if traitors were put in custody, federal grand juries and U.S. District Court trial juries are carefully screened to eliminate independent-minded persons. The American Gestapo, the FBI, constituting part of the nation's secret political police, in most federal districts, select the pool from which grand jurors are selected, and hand-pick the venire, likewise the pool, from which trial jurors are chosen. In Chicago, for example, the supposedly all-seeing FBI selected a known gangster to sit on a federal grand jury for a number of months, corrupting and perverting the process, and he being supposedly part of investigating fellow mobsters. [The Chicago U.S. District Court case of U.S. versus Robert Girardi, not adequately reported by the monopoly press. A watered down story appeared in the Chicago Tribune, January 21, 1994, "Ex-U.S. Grand Jury Member Indicted In Leaking of Information".] In its simplest explanation, we went to war in 1991 because George Herbert Walker Bush, then President, was disgruntled against his former private business partner, Saddam Hussein, the

Iraqi strongman. [Visit our website story for details, "The Secrets of Timothy McVeigh".] Hussein was installed in the 1970s, in part at the time the Elder Bush was head of America's secret police. Some ten years after 1991, we went to war again because the former head of the secret police's son, George W. Bush, is disgruntled against HIS former business partners, the Bin Laden Family and their family member Osama bin Laden, falsely described as being on the outs with his family. Osama was, like Saddam Hussein, created by the American CiA, with the connivance of former Director of Central Intelligence, the Elder Bush, as Vice President and later as President, to engage in a war with the Soviet Union. The Soviets were worn out by this. This led, in part, to the downfall of the Soviet Union and the Moscow government. Also helping destroy the Soviet Union, to make them now a "friend" of the United States, was the CIA-orchestrated attack on the Russian ruble, which undermined the Soviet's financial validity. [See the book, "Thieves World" by Claire Sterling, Simon & Shuster, New York, 1994. Also, our website story, "Marc Rich and others Fingered By A Letter".] Over the centuries, Afghanistan has been the graveyard of invaders. No prior army ever previously has succeeded against the tunnels, the mountains, the terrain. The American CIA has been instrumental, in the past, in helping the Afghans finance their way of life with growing poppies and being the supplier of upwards of sixty per cent of the heroin to Europe. With a large supply of heroin parked outside Afghanistan, the Afghans are in the works to flood heroin throughout the world AT HALF THE GOING PRICE. The Afghans resisted Unocal and others of the oil cartel, tied to the Bush Family, in putting a natural gas/oil pipeline through Afghanistan to Pakistan and to Red China. The Afghanis, in the view of the cartel, have been demanding too large a per centage as their cut for allowing the pipeline project to proceed. Hence, the oil monopoly needs to overthrow the Kabul government, install their own government, and proceed with the pipeline project. [A situation somewhat similar to the British Counter-Intelligence joint effort with CIA, in 1953, to overthrow the Iran elected government and arbitrarily restore, as a CIA puppet, the Shah to the Peacock Throne. When the Shah became difficult, in 1979 the CIA overthrew him, and installed a British Counter-Intelligence agent, Ayotollah Khomeini, to rule. George Bush worked a treasonous deal in 1980, to delay the release of 52 U.S. hostages, held by Iran, so as to make Jimmy Carter, running for re-election, appear to be a wimp. This benefitted the Reagan/Bush election campaign. The hostages were released at the very moment Reagan/Bush were inaugurated in January, 1981. This treachery by George Herbert Walker Bush was dubbed part of "The October Surprise".] British royalty put the Elder Bush into the oil business. [See, for example, "The Unauthorized Biography of George Bush" by Webster Tarpley and Anton Chaitken.] For laundering the proceeds of dope trafficking, oil deals, and weapons smuggling, the Bush Family has a joint account with the Queen of England in her private bank, Coutts Bank London. Through that joint account, hundreds of billions of illicit dollars are washed. [See our website series, "Greenspan Aids and Bribes Bush" and the Bush Family's 25 secret worldwide accounts, together with the secret federal reserve wire transfer records that can be brought up on your screen from our website, showing the hundreds of billions of dollars.] For almost 40 years, our group, the Citizen's Committee to Clean Up the Courts, has successfully time and again fingered corrupt members of the state and federal judiciary. Our firm policy always has been to NEVER divulge eyewitnesses and sources, since the government is incapable of protecting them. As the Chairman/Founder of the group, I take the responsibility of confronting the judges to their face and have suffered the consequences repeatedly over the decades. The corrupt judges have demanded I divulge methods of investigation, witnesses, and sources, and when I refuse, invoking our policy, they have time and again put me, wheelchair and all, in prison, for contempt of court, a nebulous power that seems to be inherent in their black robes of office. Most every such judge, having falsely jailed me, later was sent to jail for bribery. An identified crook on the bench is no longer useful. No decent bagman will further bother to bribe them (a funny contradiction of terms). A crooked judge is thrown away like an old shoe, no longer capable of doing as told.

I have always tried to be fair even to known corrupt judges. I have made it our policy, that I or a close associate in my presence, asks the targeted judge to confess his crimes. I explain that this will save the taxpayers expense in getting rid of the judge by having to put him or her on trial and after conviction, sending them away. [The biggest judicial bribery scandal in U.S. history, touched off by us, is now the subject of a book, "Illinois Justice" by Kenneth Manaster, published September, 2001, by University of Chicago Press. The cover of the book with my picture on it is on the website, www.rense.com Click on my name on the side where it shows columnists.] Will George Herbert Walker Bush confess his prior knowledge of the violence occurring on September 11, 2001? Will he admit that HE was running the country from in or near the White House on that tragic day? What provision, if any, of the U.S. Constitution, empowers the Elder Bush to have such a power? Will the Elder Bush confess openly his private business partnership which went sour with Saddam Hussein, being part of an unpublicized lawsuit in Chicago? [See our website series, "The Secrets of Timothy McVeigh", giving the name and number of the litigation and other details.My exclusive details were in a populist paper, Spotlight, August 19, 1991.] Will his son, George W. Bush, confess his private business partnerships with the bin Laden Family, including Osama bin Laden who is not that much on the outs with his family reportedly receiving tens of millions of dollars from them secretly? Will George W. Bush confess that he and HIS family have a huge financial interest with the oil cartel which wants to overthrow the Kabul government so the Afghanistan oil and natural gas pipeline project can proceed? Does the secret political police really know who all the hi-jackers were? Did they not use fake identification? Knowledgeable sources contend the violence of September 11, 2001, was part of a bloody internal struggle within the hierarchy in the United States. That it was done through surrogates that may not have known their handlers and patrons in the American aristocracy. More coming... Stay tuned. =============================== Since 1958, Mr. Skolnick has been a court reformer and since 1963, Founder/Chairman, Citizen's Committee to Clean Up the Courts. Since 1991, a regular panelist and since 1995, moderator/producer of "Broadsides", a taped, one-hour weekly public access Cable TV Program cablecast WITHIN CHICAGO, to upwards of 400,000 viewers each Monday evening, 9 p.m., Channel 21 Cable TV. Invoking War Power-like authority, the Younger Bush White House ordered the suppression of certain news under the disguise of plugging up leaks of so-called "military secrets". The details. For a number of years the State of Michigan, through Michigan State University, owned and operated the Michigan Biologic Products Institute. They had the exclusive contract with the Department of Defense to, among other things, develop and produce an anthrax vaccine. A strange and mysterious group, in 1998, bought out the state-owned Institute, calling themselves BIOPORT CORPORATION, and the Department of Defense became its only customer. "The takeover itself is considered suspicious by some. 'The company acquired the Michigan Biologic Products Institute for the express purpose of taking over and acquiring a lucrative military contract', said a bio-warfare expert who asked not to be named and accused company officials of 'WAR PROFITEERING'". (Emphasis added.) "Why Anthrax Vaccine is Scarce" by Kristen Philipkoski, WIREDNEWS, on-line 10/10/2001. The story went on to state "The FDA [Food and Drug Administration] repeatedly flunked BioPort in inspections in 1999 and 2000 because of contamination and suspicious changes made to

expiration dates. The agency has barred the company from releasing any of the vaccine as a result." The story went on to assert that as to the company that an audit by the Pentagon's inspector general in April 2000 that BioPort had spent several million dollars inappropriately, and paid out unsubstantiated consulting costs. WIREDNEWS further stated, "The anthrax vaccine was the subject of controversy even before it was in such high demand. Approximately 400 soldiers faced reprimands rather than take the vaccine because of side effects that some said were severe." The Board of Directors of BioPort included Admiral William J. Crowe, Jr., former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and former chairman of the President's FOREIGN INTELLIGENCE ADVISORY BOARD. Crowe is a member of the conspiratorial COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS, CFR, and chairman of the New World Order group, Senior Advisory Board for GLOBAL OPTIONS. That group included five other CFR members such as the former Director of Central Intelligence, R. James Woolsey. The administrations of Jimmy Carter, the Elder Bush, Bill Clinton, and the Younger Bush were and are absolutely riddled with CFR overlords. The stockholders of BioPort Corporation reportedly include the following: * The CARLYLE GROUP that includes former cabinet members of the Elder Bush White House and other oil monopolists, such as James A. Baker 3rd, once Secretary of State. Some contend that Baker in part handled the 40 million dollars of secret dope loot that was used to corrupt and influence DEMOCRATS in Florida to stop the ballot recount even before the U.S. Supreme Court "Gang of Five" got into the picture and installed George W. Bush as the "occupant" and "resident" of the White House. The 40 million dollars was reportedly dope trafficking funds from U.S./Colombia Medellin Dope Cartel Co-Founder Carlos Lehder. According to outspoken drug enforcement current and former officials, Lehder is the private business partner of the Bush Family. Although extradited to the U.S., prosecuted and sent to a 55-year term in U.S. prison, Lehder has disappeared from the Federal Prison System. Uncovering these details was Chandra Levy. (Visit our website story, "The Chandra Levy Affair", Part Two. Also see my various stories on the Year 2000 Presidential election.) The Carlos Lehder matter could put members of the Bush Family in long federal prison terms. The Carlyle Group, headquartered in the nation's capital, specializes in seizing control of shaky aerospace and defense contractors and then strong-arming, some say blackmailing, contracts out of the Department of Defense. An investor in the Carlyle Group has been George Herbert Walker Bush. The Elder Bush has been a paid consultant to the Bin Laden Group, helping them with his CIA links. Bush helped create Osama bin Laden as an American CIA bought and paid for alleged "terrorist", originally dubbed a "freedom fighter" to wear out the Soviets in their prolonged war, 1979-1989, in Afghanistan. The monopoly press falsely states that Osama is on the outs with his family, yet his family reportedly funnels tens of millions of dollars to Osama through banks such as Algemene Bank Nederland, now called ABN-AMRO, in part through their American flagship, Chicago-based La Salle National Bank.[We have identified La Salle as also having secret accounts for bribing state and federal judges.] To evade having their own secrets coming out linked to Osama, the Younger Bush White House flatly refuses to freeze Osama's numerous accounts, wire-transfers, and such through ABN-AMRO. The Carlyle Group, in turn, is owned and supervised by a worldwide reputed money laundry for World Government, the BLACKSTONE GROUP. * Another stockholder of BioPort Corp., is the Bin Laden Group, some 24 family members of which were whisked out of the U.S., on "safety" reasons by the secret political police, the FBI, following the September 11, 2001 events. Through the National Commerce Bank of Saudi, the Bin Laden Group reportedly also funnels large sums to Osama directly and as go-betweens of Saudi moneybags who are anti-American and support Osama bin Laden.

* BioPort Corporation Board Chairman and CEO and a sizeable stockholder, directly and as nominee for Saudi and other Mid-East interests, many reportedly supportive of Osama bin Laden, is FUAD EL-HIBRI. Under the disguise of invoking national emergency provisions, George W. Bush has ordered National Guard sentries to guard the BioPort facility in Lansing, Michigan. Bush has ordered, under pretext of "national security", that employees and officials of BioPort are forbidden to discuss with reporters, commentators, and researchers, the nature of the ownership of BioPort Corporation. This was done to preclude details of this private corporation from being publicly disclosed. This presidential edict was quietly put through just prior to the beginning of bombing by the U.S. of Afghanistan. Despite this clamp-down on disclosure, some very patriotic employees of BioPort have informed independent-minded commentators of the reputed ownership and operations details of BioPort Corporation. As part of an apparent blackmail effort against the Younger Bush White House, the Washington Post began inquiring into some of the ownership and other details mentioned herein about BioPort. Targeted to shut up by George W. Bush, has been, in particular, Post official Bob Woodward. Having no background in journalism, his stories about Watergate and such were handed to him on a silver platter by the espionage community to depose Nixon, for treason, without resorting to political assassination. Woodward's espionage background is mentioned in the book "Silent Coup"---see my website story, "The Late Grand Dragon of the Washington Post". To unsuccessfully try to block the mass media from heckling him about Watergate, Nixon threatened to prosecute some of the major news outlets for Anti-Trust violations. Similarly, the Younger Bush White House, to deter the press whores from asking real questions about anthrax vaccine and BioPort, is also raising behind the scenes threats to prosecute the six major communications empires for monopoly violations. Being basically blackmailers, the monopoly press is really not ready to scandalize the Bush Family on matters mentioned here and in related stories. The British press, however, has expressed an interest into inquiring into BioPort. After all, the Brits relish the idea of wrecking the war-mongering, often criminal American presidency as a way to destroy the American Republic. Since the War of 1812, the Brits have vowed to somehow take back this Continent as puppet colonies and to have so-called "Americans" as mere docile subjects of the British Crown. [One of the private details the Younger Bush White House is prepared to use to shut up Bob Woodward on the BioPort and the Anthrax Commissars matter is a subject most usually not to be made into a scandal subject. To some it is either a forbidden topic or laughable. Woodward's first wife, once a secretary to a long-time White House press correspondent, was reportedly divorcd from Woodward because Woodward had a vicious private disposition. Snickering commentators from grocery tabloid magazines might call such a husband a "wife-beater". Whether or not Bob Woodward is privately brutal, he is most certainly a fraudulent "reporter" easy for George W. Bush to pull on Bob Woodward's chain.] * Rev. Jesse Jackson, Sr., reportedly participates in BioPort's affairs. [Cynics wonder about the firm's convenient address, 3500 N. Martin Luther King, Jr., Blvd., Lansing, Michigan 48906; Phone [(517) 327-1500, FAX: (517) 327-1501.] In any case, accidental or not, convenient. An accomplished reputed blackmailer and shake-down artist, the Reverend strong-armed his way apparently into the strange anthrax deal. Since private citizens are forbidden by federal statute from negotiating U.S. FOREIGN POLICY, someone in the White House perhaps reminded Jesse to stay out of the Afghanistan matter where he tried to stick in his nose. Getting a piece of the action is part of Jesse's expertise. [Visit our website story, "The Jesse Jackson Affair.]

Poking into the Anthrax Commissars, such as Carlyle Group, the Blackstone Group, the Bush Family, Admiral Crowe and others, might open up many prior tragedies. Before the forming of BioPort, a supposed anthrax vaccine or substance was forced upon the U.S. Military (not the brass) in the Persian Gulf War. Some claim that such a purported "vaccine" did not have FDA approval when given and is, at least in part, responsible for the Gulf War Syndrome. In a full-scale battlefield war, the Military expects twenty per cent casualties. Some 15 thousand GI's died prematurely after the Gulf War ended, and some 85 thousand more are very sick, some terminally so, together with their wives, their childen, even their dogs and cats. Of the 500 thousand that served in that war, that means the U.S. has been afflicted with 100 thousand casualties, which the Defense Department covers up or denies, just as if the Gulf War had been a set-piece, typical war of yesteryear. At the time of this story, we common Americans are beset with statements by the Washington dictators that an anthrax "terror" attack is coming. Are the matters as simple as using uncontrollable fear to just promoting the business of the Anthrax Commissars, including the Bush Family? More coming. Skolnick - The Overthrow Of The American Republic, Part Four By Sherman H. Skolnick [email protected] www.skolnicksreport.com 10-22-1 US Facing Military Disaster? Because of war-time-like mass media censorship in the U.S., few, if any, dissenting views on Afghanistan are reported by what some call the monopoly press. Some in key places, in fact, do oppose the policies of George Herbert Walker Bush as to the Mid-East. Although his son is the current "occupant" and "resident" of the White House, the Elder Bush, as the puppet of the American aristocracy and the oil cartel, appears to be giving the orders. The Bush family are certainly well aware that if something goes wrong, they are all subject, suddenly and with scandal commotions, to be thrown away into history's junk-pile. Among those who oppose their policies are some sixty U.S. Admirals and Generals. They do not simply go along with the Establishment parade, awaiting their military retirement and their pensions. [More about them later.] A growing number of thinking people are becoming aware that the whole September 11, 2001, violence is just another step in making common Americans docile, to the point that the U.S. Bill of Rights and the U.S. Constitution, could easily, bit by bit, be suspended and the American Republic ENDED. From the Establishment's standpoint, an ideal happening is that the American commonfolk, beset with orchestrated fear and terror, will absolutely DEMAND that the American organic law be scrapped in favor of SECURITY. Some of the steps: 1. To consolidate the American secret political police under a Homeland Security Chief to serve

at the right hand of the "president" installed himself by highly questionable and controversial means. Not everyone has forgotten December, 2000. The ideas behind this, both mentioned and unmentioned, are similar to the Nazi Gestapo and the Soviet KGB. [For a federal official to dare mention the word GESTAPO is a removal or death warrant. Some years ago a more-independent-minded California U.S. District Judge, a latino, was hearing evidence in his court as to the bad practices of the Immigration and Naturalization Service, INS, and the FBI. After considering the evidence thus elicited, the Judge dared pronounce from the bench that these agencies are the American Gestapo. When I first read it in some newspaper, I said uh-oh, he is a goner. Shortly thereafter, the INJUSTICE Department tried in vain to send the Judge to prison on frivolous and foolish charges that he had a distant cousin, a mafioso. Scarred and battle-worn, the Judge beat back the muzzling efforts, an unsung hero.] Tom Ridge, the new American Gestapo Chief, head of Homeland Security, is tightly aligned with Charles Zogby and his cousin, James Zogby, president of the Arab American Institute, considered by some a militant pro-Arab lobby. Is this part of a route to manipulate Mid-East affairs, enriching and empowering the oil cartel, by putting Arabs against Israelis, and vice versa? Some think so. The British, after all, installed the State of Israel to act as an irritant against the oil-soaked Moslem nations surrounding the tiny nation. Thus keeping such nations perpetually off-balance and subject to Anglo-American oil financial control. 2. The liars and whores of the press continue to escalate the terror scenario against the often poorly informed people. Stories scream out at us, ANTHRAX! soon to be followed by hollaring SMALL POX! BUBONIC PLAGUE! BOTULISM! To their credit, some scientists, not those acceptable as paid consultants to the newsfakers, point out the difficulties in using anthrax against large numbers of people all at one time. The pharmaceutical monopolies, set to heavily profit, see this as a great opportunity. For some time, they have been promoting their prescription-required nostrums on the television, to have those with vague aches and pains disregard medicinal side-effects, and bombard their doctors with demands for such supposed cure-all pills and capsules. One magazine head-lined it, "PRIMETIME PUSHERS---Freed from federal restrictions, pharmaceutical companies are flooding television with ads for prescription drugs. What does it mean for our health care when serious medicine is marketed like soap?" Mother Jones Magazine, March/April, 2001. As the article stated in another headline, "Direct-to-consumer advertising has paid off for the drug companies, often turning solid earners into blockbuster drugs". The highly political and corrupt U.S. Food and Death Administration, FDA, has turned loose the airwaves with these pill and capsule factories. The drug companies, financially interlocked with the television networks, and their affiliates, are set to promote their expensive remedies for anthrax, and such, just like soap-drugs they already push on us. The drug factories violently oppose those who could produce the same so-called remedies as generic drugs. Also, some contend there are simpler, less expensive, already known ways to combat these poisons.

3. So far, the monopoly press studiously avoids discussing prior knowledge of the Bush White House and others, as to the September 11, 2001, violence. To brainwash youngsters with little knowledge of the debacle at Pearl Harbor, Mickey Mouse came out with a movie omitting the prior knowledge of the Roosevelt White House in allowing us to slip into a World War, first with Japan, and then Germany, now fully documented. We had to go to war with Japan first, so that Germany, who did not want to fight a huge population, industrial giant like the U.S., would feel compelled to Declare War on us pursuant to their Axis pact with Japan. Pushing the U.S. falsely into World War Two was to save Great Britain without the means to fight off Hitler on their own. Will it take another sixty years from 2001, until Americans, if they still have their Bill of Rights and U.S. Constitution intact, to accept the prior knowledge of the 911 disaster? Needed to be done: LET THOSE KNOWING ABOUT PRIOR KNOWLEDGE BE HEARD NATIONWIDE uncensored. 4. Demonizing rhe CIA-created devil, Osama bin Laden, is the entire focus of the Establishment. America will have permanent happiness and prosperity, they claim, if only Osama's head could be delivered on a platter to the oil-soaked Bush White House. In a similar vein, the Elder Bush White House asserted the same, 1990-1991, in demonizing his former private business partner,Saddam Hussein, the Iraqi strongman originally installed by the American CIA. Like Daddy Bush, George W. Bush has declared war on HIS former private business partner, Osama bin Laden. [For more details, visit earlier parts of this website series as well as related stories, such as "The Chandra Levy Affair, Part Two" and "The Secrets of Timothy McVeigh".] 5. A growing number of better-informed folks understand that the entire Afghanistan Affair revolves around major oil companies, tied to the Bush Family, for some years now planning a natural gas/oil pipeline through Afghanistan to Pakistan, Red China, and elsewhere. The Kabul government apparently demanded too high a cut of the action, thus interfering with the pipeline plan. Remedy? Simple. Find an excuse, to try to overthrow by force the Kabul government and replace it with one that will NOT question the pipeline deal. Is the oil-soaked, war-mongering, monopoly press, shackled and hand-cuffed as they are to the American aristocracy, prepared to finger the Bush Family as tied to the oil cartel and their Afghanistan pipeline plans? What the sixty very brave, very patriotic U.S. Admirals and Generals will do (out of some 600 flag officers), while understanding this treason and dissenting from current policies, remains to be seen. Contained in some of our prior stories are the details of the 24 flag officers, as authorized by the Uniform Military Code, who vowed to arrest their Commander-in-Chief Bill Clinton for documented charges of treason. As we have written in exclusive prior stories, if Clinton arrested them for mutiny, if they were not assassinated, they intended to defend themselves with documents of his treason with Red China and Iraq jointly with the Elder Bush. Ten of those original 24 flag officers have been assassinated. Some of their names are in a prior part of this series. What will come of the current 60 such flag officers who apparently oppose George W. Bush? History will tell.

A very high, non-U.S. military officer, extremely well-informed, contends that the U.S. is facing a land-war military disaster in Afghanistan. Obviously, if true, it could bring down the American Central Government and with it the Bill of Rights and the U.S. Constitution. The 60 American flag officers agree, and assert that a coup d'etat, for the good and not for evil,is absolutely necessary to save the American Republic. The source asserts that several battalions of Ranger-like U.S. forces were on the ground in Afghanistan. They relied, he contends, on the assistance of the supposed opposition to the Taliban, namely, the Northern Alliance, which either steered them into a trap or knowingly withdrew their guidance at a key moment. Some 250 to 400 U.S. Military was thus slaughtered, according to the well-positioned source. So far, this has not been confirmed by other sources, foreign or domestic. If so, the cover up, the body bags, will not be returned to the U.S., for six months, if ever. If true, it raises the entire question of land-invasion of Afghanistan as being the fore-runner of possible U.S. Military disaster. A nation that loses a war, soon has their government overthrown, often by evil-doers. The criminal-element that took over the Moscow government after the humiliating Soviet defeat in Afghanistan should be clear to most people. By the way, as we have pointed out, the Russian mafiya operates in the United States, like the Red Chinese Secret Police, with complete impunity and immunity from the FBI/CIA. The Russian criminals, such as in Chicago, operate the Red Light District and circulate, without restraint, superior quality counterfeit U.S. and other currencies, as well as using stolen credit cards and identities. Most of the Russian mafiya in the U.S. are former KGB officers adept at their ways, and the FBI is frightened of them. Busy with themselves and their families, and worried about their jobs, the ordinary Americans have to be repeatedly reminded of history. With its terrain, secret tunnels developed over centures, and mountains, Afghanistan has always been the graveyard of invaders. Will the American Republic be saved? More coming. Stay tuned. The Overthrow Of The American Republic - Part Five Disclosures And Financial Crisis? By Sherman H. Skolnick [email protected] www.skolnicksreport.com 11-4-1 We were the first, earlier in this series, to mention that the Bush White House flatly refused to freeze-up accounts of so-called "terrorists" such as Osama bin Laden in ABN-AMRO, the Dutch bank octopus, operating in 15 major U.S. cities, including Chicago. Why? Simply put, because the secret accounts implicated the Bush Family jointly with the so-called "terrorists". Freezing those accounts in the billions of dollars would inevitably lead to disclosures of the huge financial tie-in between the Bush Family and the worldwide bin Laden Group business cartel and their relative Osama bin Laden. Although demonized as the head "terrorist" of the world, Osama reportedly does get huge sums, clandestinely transferred, through members of the Saudi Royal

Family who are secretly, some openly, anti-American. The reputed transit point? Algemene Bank Nederland, known as ABN-AMRO. And, not everyone accepts as a fact that Osama has been cut off from heavy funding of his family members, 24 top ones having resided in the U.S. until a few days after the September 11, 2001 violence. The Bush Family is tied financially to the Carlyle Group which, in turn, has had Daddy Bush as a heavily paid consultant to the bin Laden Group, and ultimately, to Osama, once described by Daddy and the American CIA as a "freedom fighter" when Osama carried out the Bush/CIA agenda to drive the Soviets into humiliation by stalemating them in the Afghan-Soviet War, 1979-1989. That led, in part, to the downfall of the Soviet Union, to breakaway provinces, also by way of the CIA-orchestrated attack on the Soviet Ruble currency. The oil cartel, headed by Unocal and others, tied to the Bush Family, have instigated the whole war with Afghanistan because the Taliban/Kabul government interfered with letting the natural gas/oil pipeline through Afghanistan and then, as planned, on to Pakistan as a link to energy-hungry India, Red China, and Japan. In its simplest form, Osama and the Taliban wanted a bigger cut than they were offered by the oil consortium. Some of the huge joint secret accounts at ABN-AMRO linking the Bush Family to bin Laden Group and Osama bin Laden are reportedly tied to the Unocal oil consortium. Key officials of Taliban, now demonized, were honored guests in Texas by Unocal when George W. Bush was Governor. Details are tucked away in a Chicago Tribune story, 10/21/2001, "University helped U.S. Reach Out to Taliban". [For background, visit all the previous parts of this series and related items.] My story referring to the Bush White House flatly refusing to freeze up so-called "terrorist" accounts at ABN-AMRO, touched off a furor by being replicated on other websites worldwide. Result? The more independent-minded Internal Affairs unit of the U.S. Treasury Department, finally ordered the freeze up of those accounts, leading to an analysis of who and what and where. [The same unit investigated the 25 worldwide secret accounts of the Bush Family, used for laundering billions and billions of dollars of illicit funds from dope trafficking and such. See the secret Federal Reserve wire transfer records, transfers authorized by the secret code of Alan Greenspan, attached to our website series "Greenspan Aids and Bribes Bush". Experts examining the records proclaim they are authentic.] Years ago, the late currency expert, Franz Pik, said that sooner or later, every nation gets into a crunch and has to renounce and repudiate their paper securities. Such as their bonded debt issued by or for their Treasury. Is the U.S. next? Partly a consequence of a White House treason scandal? U.S. tax collection income has dropped drastically, recession-style. Through their purported fiscal agent, the Federal Reserve (NOT a U.S. government entity but a private, some say conspiratorial, central bank), the U.S. Treasury may have to repudiate ALL U.S. Treasury securities---an unthinkable calamity. Nevertheless, the Treasury is proceeding toward that wreckage. They have announced, about the time of the ABN-AMRO freeze-up, that they will no longer issue long-term U.S. Bonds, called 30-year Treasury Bonds. When the present ones come due, they will not be, as in the past, subject to optional roll-over into another long-term issue. Senior citizens, pension funds, and banks and such, that rely on the coupon interest of such bonds will be cut off. U.S. Treasury securities are part of the capital structure of banks. Several money center banks have capital way below---some below zero---the minimum approximately three cents of the fractional reserve dollar required by federal regulators. Included in this insolvent category is Bank of America, owned principally nowadays by the Japanese mafia, the Yakuza, and the older group

of owners being the French Rothschilds and the Jesuits. Also apparently insolvent is Bank One, formerly known as First National Bank of Chicago, dominated by the Rockefellers. [See the background of the Rockefeller Banks and the human body parts business and other bloody work, in our website series, "The Red Chinese Secret Police IN THE UNITED STATES".] Another apparently insolvent bank octopus is First Union. It is little-known that it is tied to the scandal-ridden Lippo Group, ethnic Chinese and the Red Chinese Secret Police. Do you remember First Union's surrealistic television ads showing a weird blizzard of papers and people flying down Wall Street, and then one of them falls down and like a mannequin, disintegrates? [Sort of like what happened in Lower Manhattan on September 11, 2001?] By stopping the issuance of 30-year Bonds, the Treasury has only temporarily boosted the price, on the market of such bonds, thus artificially, for the moment, pumping up such failing banks as to their capital structure. Will they next renounce and repudiate U.S. Treasury securities, such as Bills, which are short-term, and Notes, which are mid-term, like five year maturity? By halting the issuance of U.S. Treasury long-term bonds, the U.S. government is going to have to squeeze big oney out of their former enemy, Germany, to finance the U.S. recession-created debt. The budget surplus has apparently disappeared in a puff of financial smoke. As some historians point out, a nation that loses a war soon is swept into the junk-pile and overthrown. Do we have to be reminded that we could not conquer Viet Nam, populated by a fiercely historic people. We were the ones that lost the war and departed, some say humiliated. Outspoken activist Dick Gregory once mentioned that it cost the U.S. half a million dollars for every Viet Namese we slaughtered. It would have been cheaper, he claimed, to pay them all to leave their country and the U.S. pave it over with green cement, to match the jungle. Some contend a perverted, certifiably crazy, satanic-dominated element in the American aristocracy has created the terror syndrome now gripping America and falsely blamed by the press whores on Moslems. If this is some kind of latter day religious crusade, supposedly "Christians" versus Moslems, have the Establishment pundits forgotten the bloody history of such movements? Some rightfully contend that the anthrax, courtesy of the U.S. aristocracy, is actually supplied from U.S.Military and other government storage. And others assert, with scientific supporting details, that the supposedly suicide commercial planes of the 911 tragedy, were actually computer-controlled from the ground and the supposed on-board "kamikaze" Moslems thought it was just a routine hostage flight, not a suicide mission. [As to the ground-based computers used to over-ride the airplane on-board computers, put the term GLOBAL HAWK into a web search engine.] The White House and the U.S. government may be swept away in treachery at the highest level stemming from disclosures resulting from freezing up so-called "terrorist" accounts in banks like ABN-AMRO. Also tied in, the Red Chinese Secret Police, the Chicago markets, such as the Chicago Mercantile Exchange reportedly handling so-called "terrorist" funds and put options with prior knowledge of the 911 violence. The foreign press relishes attacking the highly-vulnerable Bush Family administration implicated in oil-soaked and dope-linked laundering. Siding supposedly with the Northern Alliance, the White House would like to avoid mentioning that this supposed dissident group in Afghanistan are in charge of the vast dope trafficking to Europe. U.S. soldiers are going to die to safeguard major dope traffickers? Are common Americans facing a financial crisis brought on by disclosures of treachery and the

so-called U.S. Dollar no longer backed and supported, directly or indirectly, by U.S. Treasury securities? And after U.S. Treasury Bonds are scrapped, is the next to be thrown away, being the organic law, the Bill of Rights and the U.S. Constitution? All this is a study of the American Establishment and their treason. Stay tuned. Throughout history, there has been more or less a debate. Do great movements require great men? Or, do great men create great movements? The "Black Messiah" was assassinated, April, 1968. Labeled as such by FBI's Counter-Intelligence, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., was replaced by the FBI installing as a purported "black leader" Rev. Jesse Jackson, a reputed stool pigeon all his adult life for the secret political police. Were the aspirations of Afro-Americans blockaded by the political assassination of Dr. King? [In 1972, our work in finding and interviewing witnesses caused Rev. Jackson to be indicted on federal criminal charges of extortion done in the name of human rights. Jesse's cohorts gave a gift or bribe of 850 thousand dollars to the Nixon White House to squash the charges and re-assign the federal prosecutor. See our website story, "The Rev. Jesse Jackson Affair", also, "Murder of Dr. King---Unspoken Details, Part One".] On our Chicago-based public access weekly Cable TV Program, "Broadsides", we did a series, with savvy guests, called "The Irish Question". I asked one guest, "Why does Mayor Richie Daley, a devout Catholic [son of the late Chicago Mayor Richard J. Daley], kiss the hand, so to speak, of the Queen of England when she visits Chicago?" The blunt answer, "He'd be assassinated otherwise".[Do I have to re-invent the wheel of history, to prove the Monarchy is heavily anti-Irish Catholic?] I asked another guest, an expert on history at a local fancy private major university, "Why is the monopoly press in the United States, so pro-British, forever bad-mouthing Irish Catholics?" The professor, a British mouthpiece from his other comments, said the American press is not so beholden to the British anymore. I said, "I do not think that is true and when did the press stop being pro-British?" When I said, "Do you have confidence in the Queen's newspaper, the Chicago Tribune?" The university pundit got all choked up. The FBI and the Justice Department have been part of at least three projects, by religious profiling and frame-ups, to seek to destroy, in the Chicago-area, prominent and influential Irish Catholics. Thereby endeavoring to eliminate those who tend to vote for the Democrat Party and have an effect nationwide. [In the very close popular vote for President in 1960, the winner needed to carry Illinois' Electoral Vote to succeed. Pushing into service local gangsters like Sam "Momo" Giancana, Mayor Richard J. Daley arranged to steal eight thousand votes. John F. Kennedy was thus elected, but three years later, as the nation's first Catholic President, was assassinated by a high-level plot.] [1] >From 1971 to 1975, the Rockefeller Family creation, Jim Thompson, was the Chief Federal Hang Man in Chicago. Called "Big Jim", he step by step by minor real federal criminal charges, or major frame-ups, targeted those around Richard J. Daley, a national strongman since first elected Chicago Mayor in the 1950s. His power waning, Daley died of a purported "heart attack", 1976 [was it caused by the reputed adulterated swine flu shot given him the day before?] Mostly unknown to Thompson, Daley, however, had a counter-attack unit with operatives with street smarts. They knew how to deal with "outsiders". Part of the command of that team was John J. Clarke. He neutralized the tall U.S. Attorney/persecutor by luring him into compromising situations where Big Jim was photographed cavorting with male prostitutes. Despite that, further sponsored by the Rockefellers, Big Jim was Illinois Governor from 1976 to 1990. In later years

Big Jim was the Chairman of the huge international law factory, headquartered in Chicago, Winston & Strawn. As detailed on our Cable TV Show, November, 1994, the firm had a reputed walled-off operation, headed by Thompson, not doing law work but rather laundering huge funds worldwide from dope trafficking, as confirmed to our show by several employees of the firm. [2] As seldom if ever discussed (except by us), the media monster, Tribune Company, parent of the Chicago Tribune, among other outlets, has as major owners members of the British royal family (as shown by previous ownership disclosures required under Postal regulations). Over the many years, the Tribune got their pulp for their print units through a Canadian charter, effective in perpetuity and signed in the 19th Century by the King of England, and carried out through Jesuits north of the border. Traditionally, the top official of the Tribune Company was also the top official of the Chicago District Federal Reserve Bank. In 1989, the day before the inauguration of Daddy Bush as President, the Chicago Tribune, rightfully called the Queen's newspaper, started a vicious attack on the Monarchy's historic opponents, the prominent and influential Irish Catholics, members of the Chicago Board of Trade, bastion as well of the French Rothschilds tied for centuries to the Vatican. Planting the details, in the Chicago Tribune, in a major story to dirty up the CBOT, as it is called, was the head of the Federal Reserve Bank/Chicago/Board Chairman of the Tribune Company. The Daddy Bush inauguration date is significant. He was started in the oil business in the 1950s by members of the British Monarchy. When the Queen visits the U.S., she boards and merges her horses with those of Bush's closest pal, handler of the Bush Family's secret trusts. [See details in "Unauthorized Biography of George Bush" by Webster .Tarpley.] Our website series, "Greenspan Aids and Bribes Bush", has attached documents showing the Bush Family, through their secret fronts, has a joint account with the Queen of England, through her private bank, Coutts Bank, London, where hundreds of billions of dollars from illicit trafficking are laundered. The traders and speculators on the CBOT, were targeted for mostly five dollar discrepancies, to which no brokerage customer complained. It was an accepted industry practice called "front running" where commodity brokers occasionally put in their own trades, scalping off usually small amounts, ahead of their customers' accounts. On these five dollar trading gimmicks, the Bush Justice Department spent five million dollars to persecute mostly very young CBOT members. Seeking by frame-ups to dominate the Board of Trade, the soybean monopoly, run by Archer-Daniels-Midland, ADM, did more than just instigate the federal criminal charges. In an unprecedented move, trained in Switzerland by Marc Rich International, were "moles". ADM paid for and supplied these provocateurs to the FBI. They infiltrated the trading pits and in favorite eating and drinking places, while wearing an FBI/ADM "wire", got some of the traders to discuss the accepted practice of "front running". Also, ADM reportedly supplied huge funding, separate and apart from the U.S. Treasury, for the Chicago office of U.S. Attorney. In effect, the Federal prosecutors, or persecutors, were working for ADM rather than, under law, as employees of the federal government. Chicken-hearted defense attorneys, although paid huge sums, did not make much, if anything, of these apparent unlawful goings on with the Federal Hang Man's Office. In 1992, when the "Soybean Ten" group of cases, as they were called, came to the Federal Appeals Court in Chicago, I was there. Sitting in my wheelchair, ahead of all the other spectators, I observed the hearing close-up, moreso than others. Some of the "Ten" for a million dollars hired a charming law-faker, Alan Dershowitz. Being the son of a tailor, I wondered why this million dollar fee-getter was there in a crumpled suit looking like he slept in it for a month. Before the scheduled hearing, I had faxed to Dershowitz a run-down of the serious conflicts of interest of the banker-judges on the appeals court which most often is the end of the line for federal cases. [The U.S. Supreme Court Justices, perhaps because they are so old or so lazy,

agree to hear only about a hundred of the six or seven thousand cases annuallly coming up to their Court. At the beginning of a recent term, the high court in Washington had 1600 "begging" petitions as they are known, imploring entrance to the Court. Without stating a reason, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected ALL of them.] Before the hearing in the federal appeals courtroom, I discussed the conflicts of interest with some of the families of some of the defendants who, although having no prior criminal record, were nevertheless not allowed out on bail pending the appeal. The response of the relatives to me was a straight-out insult, "Who the hell are you Mr. Skolnick?" They were convinced their million dollars had purchased Dershowitz "the wonder worker". The three-judge appeals court panel was headed by Judge Richard D. Cudahy, described in the lawyers' newspaper, the Chicago Daily Law Bulletin, as the richest judge in America. His mandatory financial disclosure form of many pages, showed he heads the Patrick Cudahy Trust, a huge financial left-over from the meat-packing and commodity giant, Cudahy Co. Clearly, at his hands, the law and the facts be damned. So, for financial reasons, Banker-Judge Cudahy opposed the "Soybean Ten" and was going to put them into a further meat-grinder. Dershowitz' use of his allotted twelve minutes for oral argument was cryptic.[Like a military junta, dispensing drumhead "justice", the judges, when the twelve minutes are up, cut off the lawyers right in the middle of a sentence.] Dershowitz compared the criminal charges against the defendants, his clients, somehow, to the Blue Line bus route in Cambridge, Mass., location of Harvard University where he teaches law. What the Blue Line route has to do with the five dollar "front running" deals was never made clear. Others of the "Ten" were represented by Jayne Thompson, wife of Big Jim. It was laughable why the defendants for her supposed "clout", paid her one hundred thousand dollars for her allotted twelve minute presentation. As she started addressing the judges from the courtroom lectern, she stopped. Apparently she was not prepared. She loudly whispered over to Dershowitz at the counsel table, "Alan, what should I tell the Judges?" No one dared laugh, certainly not me sitting so close to the Judges. I worried---would contemptible judges put me in contempt? After the hearing, I asked Dershowitz why he did nothing about the outrageous conflicts of interest of the banker-judges. Although I had a written confirming letter from his office assistant, Dershowitz falsely denied that his office ever received my faxed details. Naturally, Judge "Patrick Cudahy Trust" upheld the criminal charges against the "Soybean Ten" or should they be called "The Suckers Ten". [View our related details "Marc Rich---Swindling the Pope's Soybean Company" where we detail the witnessed confession of a Director of the Chicago Board of Trade that five federal judges were bribed 62 million dollars in civil cases involving soybeans to wreck the Pope's firm, Ferruzzi.] [3] Shortly after George W. Bush, "DUB-YA "(said quickly Texas-style) was installed as the occupant and resident of the Oval Office (because of the strange and corrupt way he got there, I do not refer to him as "President", rather I prefer BUSHFRAUD), he came to Chicago and had a more or less private visit with some on the Chicago Board of Trade. As some of them related it to an independent-minded commentator, in rather blunt terms, Bush let them understand that if they did not support his administration, financially and otherwise, that like his father in 1989, he would do a number on them. Those that witnessed the event say they were both outraged and felt threatened. Among other things, they relate that Bush expected them to continue quietly laundering Bush Family espionage, weapons dealing, and dope trafficking loot disguised as soybeans and such. Just like they did for the Bush Family pal, Bill Clinton, and like the CBOT honchos have been doing for the Red Chinese Secret Police. Thereafter started stories planted with the press-fakers that Chicago needs a new U.S. Attorney,

appointed not from local lawyers but from out of town. Chosen was a New York Assistant U.S. Attorney, Patrick Fitzgerald, a purported counter-terrorism expert. Members of the Board of Trade began hearing stories that Fitzgerald was preparing to hang as many as a hundred CBOT traders and speculators. Some whispered, "We thought he is a green, a Catholic. Maybe he is secretly a Protestant, an Orange man." Shortly thereafter the federal music started. Hang Man Fitzgerald filed a criminal complaint in Chicago federal court accusing Michael Segal, president and chief operating officer of Near North Insurance, of embezzling insurance premiums from a trust fund required to be kept by insurance brokers under Illinois law. The losses exceeded twenty two million dollars, according to the charges. The Queen's newsrag headlined the event, "Exec Who Built Firm on Clout Indicted", referring to it as "Segal's firm, the second-largest insurance brokerage in Illinois, is a classic Chicago business that used its political connections to win lucrative no-bid government contracts." The agency employs nearly 1,000 around the nation and in London. The firm's sales exceed one hundred million dollars annually. (Chicago Tribune, 1/29/02.) Between that story and the one in the Chicago Sun-Times the same day, there is implicit that current Chicago Mayor, Richard M. Daley, unlawfully benefitted from the purported embezzled money. The Sun-Times is owned by a combination of a Canadian, Conrad Black, tied to the British Monarchy and a little-known purported ownership being the Red Chinese Secret Police. So, has a supposed federal counter-terrorism expert come to Chicago, as a federal executioneer, preparing to terrorize, if not actually destroy, prominent and influential Irish Catholics and their pals? Note this background. The office of U.S. Attorney in Chicago has authority over the 19 counties as the northern tier of Illinois. For federal purposes, it is called the Northern District of Illinois. Despite the area covered, the Federal Hang Man in Chicago in many decades past, has been willfully blind to any corruption and criminality outside of Cook County, site of Chicago. For example, in the 1980s, the U.S. persecutor targeted mostly minor matters, mostly black aldermen of the City Council of Chicago. (Some wondered outloud, only black public officials in Chicago take bribes? Polish aldermen do not take bribes, small or otherwise? Really? And there are no bigtime corporate pirates in the Northern District? Really?) Why didn't the federal executioneer put a rope around the neck of the five Chicago federal judges who took bribes in civil cases in soybean matters, such as those used to swindle the Pope's soybean firm, Ferruzzi? In recent years, the Queen's paper, the Chicago Tribune, has as their best paid so-called "writer" John Kass. (He replaced Mike Royko who died.) As a dirty-mouthed gossip peddler, Kass is forever aiming his bayonet tongue at Chicago Mayor Richie Daley. We fingered Kass on our Cable TV Show entitled "Who is a Blackmailer". Thereafter, Kass sheepishly did admit he was a pal of Chicago lawyer Edward R. Vrdolyak. Of course, Kass does not bother to state that "Fast Eddie" has been slapped down by the Illinois Supreme and other courts as "unethical". Others have accused him of reportedly buying judgeships, bribing police, and even bribing judges. Knowledgeable locals refer to the apparent unholy deal "Fast Eddie" made when he switched from "Young Turk" Democrat to Republican---a deal with the highly political, highly corrupt top IRS officials, reportedly to escape tax-cheating charges. So, John Kass can be counted on to go along with any reported effort, by the Tribune Company and others, to frame up Richie Daley in the Michael Segal Affair, or something else. Hey, isn't it unlawful to profile Irish Catholics and target them simply because they are Irish Catholics? And who in the oil-soaked, spy-riddled, pro-British, American monopoly press would dare deal with this topic? As matters develop, we may from time to time add to this series. Stay tuned. The Overthrow Of The American Republic - Part 7

The Murder Of Two Journalists Named Danny By Sherman H. Skolnick [email protected] www.skolnicksreport.com 2-24-2 Some, like this writer, prefer to call them collectively, the oil-soaked, spy-riddled, pro-British monopoly press. If you hope to be a well-paid functionary, within their circle, you better not mouth off like that, so employers, or would-be employers, link those stones as being hurled by you. Part of destroying the American Republic can be divided into two parts. [1] Ambitious types who want to get up the media ladder and are not that particular how. Especially, if they somehow, accidentally, or otherwise, become privy to data about high-level instigated political assassinations. Those include Dan Rather, Cokie Roberts, and Robert MacNeil owner of the Robert MacNeil/JimLehrer News Hour on PBS Network. They have been part of the Big Lie, that President John F. Kennedy was murdered by a "lone assassin". [Visit our website story, "The Liars and Whores of the Press" and compare that to the lies in Dan Rather's book "The Camera Never Blinks", paperback reprinted 1988.] [2] Journalists who are in, or have ambition to be in, the monopoly press. One such was Danny Casolaro. He had great hopes of becoming financially well-off from a sizeable media publisher going with his book about "The Octopus", his title to tie together one giant criminal/espionage group of enterprises, including the following: ===The Inslaw Affair. There was a company with that name that had developed and owned the exclusive rights to software originally designed for federal prosecutors to manage their caseload, called PROMIS (pronounced PRO-MISS, not like PROMISE). Reagan Administration U.S. Attorney General Edwin Meese and other high-level White House officials had stolen the Inslaw software and re-sold it, secretly, to various foreign intelligence agencies, some friendly, some enemies or would-be enemies. In the process, they had built into it a secret "trap door", capable of sending out or up, signals to be monitored by the American CIA. This enabled American officials to spy on, and blackmail other intelligence agencies, including those in Canada, Sweden, Israel, Iraq, among others. === "The October Surprise". Running in 1980 under Ronald Reagan for President, was George Herbert Walker Bush, as Vice President. Daddy Bush was part of a scheme together with Bill Casey, campaign chief, later to be made Director of Central Intelligence. The trick? In September, 1980, to support the price of oil expected otherwise to decline, the Rockefeller Family instigated a war between two major oil producers, Iran and Iraq. The purpose was to prevent what happened later, drastically low prices for petroleum. The Reagan/Bush ticket was worried that their presidential election opponent, incumbent Jimmy Carter, would somehow, right before the November election, get the release of the 52 U.S. Embassy hostages held by Iran since 1979. That would enhance Carter's chances of winning in a recession year like 1980. Hence, the worry was about an "October Surprise". In October, 1980, in or near Paris, France, Daddy Bush worked a secret deal---clearly, treasonous---to reward top Iranian officials there meeting with him, to delay the release of the hostages until the Reagan/Bush ticket won the Election and was safely inaugurated. In January, 1981, at high noon, just as Reagan/Bush were inaugurated, the 52 hostages were released. The Iranian top officials had been paid off even before the Election, with clandestine weapons shipments to Iran via Portugal and trans-shipped through Israel. The Prime Minister of Portugal and another cabinet member there, disgruntled at what Daddy Bush got them into, were later assassinated by Bush's airplane sabotage murder team in the American CIA. (Recently, a hot topic in the Portugeuse press.)

=== The Iran-Contra treasonous dealings implicating Reagan/Bush and the new Director of Central Intelligence, Bill Casey. Reputed spy-agency operative, Bob Woodward, supposedly a writer for the Washington Post, posing as a priest, got into the hospital where Casey was ailing and may have had a part in what some contend was the murder of Casey in 1987. [For the spy background of Woodward, visit our website story, "The Grand Dragon of the Washington Post".] Members of Congress later admitted, off the record, that they had sufficient data to impeach Reagan, but hesitated, in view of the Nixon/Watergate example of a commotion. Danny Casolaro had come up with what he and his publishing industry confidants thought was the "smoking gun" of these and other details of the vast treasonous combine he labeled as "The Octopus". Casolaro's fatal mistakes? He trusted his findings and his notes of his interviews, and the outline of his planned book, too much to friendly-seeming spy-types who were supposedly aiding him in his book venture. Danny needed to be bailed out of his financial woes. He was too proud to continue thinking to get financial help from his brother, a Doctor. Danny Casolaro's mindset was entirely too much like a journalist thinking he was about to strike it rich, nail down his career, within the monopoly media and CIA-aiding publishing field for books and magazines. Our examination of his notebooks causes us to reach what some might call an unfair conclusion about someone who can no longer respond to what we say. Danny seemed, at least from his notes, not to be sufficiently sophisticated to deal with this type of subject matter. On the other hand, circumstances that argue in favor of the idea that he was on the right track? That in the summer of 1991, in Martinsburg, West Virginia, he was "suicided". That is, murdered and made to look like a suicide. [In September, 1992, a Congressional Report on the Inslaw Affair, agreed that Casolaro was most likely murdered.] As we have written about the Rockefeller Family, they like to dominate states with sizeable geography and small populations, that also tend to be lawless, and where the Rockefellers can buy out and dominate the top state officials, such as West Virginia and Arkansas. Note that the great grandson of old John D. Rockefeller, founder of the infamous bloody Standard Oil Trust, namely John D. Rockefeller 4th, has been U.S. Senator from West Virginia. Senator Rockefeller's wife, Sharon Percy Rockefeller, plays a key role with NPR, which we call National Petroleum Radio and PBS Network. Once Arkansas Governor was William Rockefeller Clinton [elsewhere we explain why we use that as his middle name]. See our website series, "Wal-Mart and The Red Chinese Secret Police". So, if you have a business partner you want to get rid of, lure him, so you can conveniently have him knocked off with no investigation expected, some cynics contend, to Martinsburg. Danny Casolaro was embalmed apparently without an autopsy or informing his family of his death by the authorities in Martinsburg. Background data is in the book "The Octopus: The Secret Government and Death of Danny Casolaro" by Kenn Thomas [editor of Steamshovel Press and Magazine] and Jim Keith, hardcover, 1996. Danny Casolaro had come up with damning proof, possibly the smoking gun, showing Daddy Bush committed treason against the U.S. Constitution and the American common people. Danny was likewise tying up the details of the corrupt upper level of IRS officials shackled to and operating with the American CIA, to carry out treachery against the American people. Danny had secretly met in Martinsburg with some of his IRS sources. Did he drink too much while in that town and began bragging to others in a cocktail lounge? Some think so. To us, a comparable example is Danny Pearl, South Asia bureau chief of The Wall Street Journal. In a post-murder story in the Journal, he was described as "A skeptic of all institutions, from big government to big business...." Wall St. Journal, 2/22/02. Despite that description Danny Pearl was, or obviously had to be, a great believer in the monopoly press. Otherwise, what was he, a supposed "skeptic", working for a known financial industry faker and censorship machine

like the Dow Jones & Co. unit, The Wall Street Journal? For example, tied like his brother Raul to major dope trafficking was Mexico President Carlos Salinas. The former Mexican strongman went on to become a DIRECTOR OF DOW JONES & CO. Sarcastic sorts wonder how much did it cost the reputed dope king to BUY such a Directorship? When it became too-well known about the dope cover up, Carlos Salinas apparently fled into exile in Dublin, Ireland. Sheepishly, the Journal tried to explain away his role at the parent firm, Dow Jones & Co. "Carlos Salinas, who is a board member of Dow Jones & Co., publisher of The Wall Street Journal, hasn't been charged with any wrongdoing." Quoting from The Wall Street Journal in "Left Business Observer", #68, March, 1995. Also see various Journal stories, such as 3/8/95. Several hundred stories about Carlos Salinas and the dope trafficking, are listed by search engine, www.google.com See, for example, www.narconews.com/salinasagain.html Also, Time Magazine, 2/10/97. As the Journal's South Asia bureau chief, Danny Pearl was well aware that the Bush Family were greatly implicated with the massive flow of drug trafficking from the poppy production in Afghanistan to the ethnic Albanian traffickers masquerading as the Kosovo Liberation Army, KLA, who according to law authorities are flooding Europe with dope. Bush Family cronies in the American CIA have been supervising the KLA. [View our website series, "Greenspan Aids and Bribes Bush" and the attached documents showing hundreds of BILLIONS of dollars being washed through a Bush Family joint account with the Queen of England at her private bank, Coutts Bank London.] Like Danny Casolaro, Danny Pearl's fatal mistakes included the following: === Trusting the higher ups at the Journal, same ones that covered up for Dow Jones Director Carlos Salinas, to know what Pearl was working on as stories. Such as some of the following---Among the little known details, is that India was the subject of a beginning of the 20th Century pact, with complex provisions, to give up a portion of their territory by the advent of the 21st Century, to Afghanistan. This pact was worked out by the British, experts on divide and conquer. By 1948, the British decided to give up direct control of their colony, India, because ot the activist commotions of Mohandas K. Gandhi. For the benefit of the British, however, Gandhi was assassinated in 1948 and blamed onto "religious fanatics". Carved out of India territory by the British in 1947, was Pakistan, out of predominantly moslem areas of India. In the partition of India, the British created the perpetual irritant, Kashmir, to forever keep India and Pakistan fighting each other. Because of the century-old pact, removing some of the territory now called Pakistan, expiring more or less at the beginning of the 21st Century, Pakistan had an interest to dominate Afghanistan and their more or less lawless government in Kabul. About 1996, the Pakistan secret political police, Inter-Services Intelligence agency, the ISI, arranged for the Taliban to control Afghanistan with stringent and backward supposedly "religious" mandates. In 1997, Union Oil of California, Unocal, in which the Bush Family has huge financial interests, was part of a consortium of firms planning as a short-cut, to build a natural gas/oil pipeline from Central Asia across Afghanistan, to oil and natural gas-hungry Pakistan, India, and eventually, points east, such as Japan. Unocal invited top Taliban officials to be wined and dined at Unocal facilities in the Houston suburb, Sugarland, with Daddy Bush residing, among other places, in Houston. Unocal was getting set to train Afghans for the building of the pipeline. The problems that developed included Osama bin Laden and the Taliban demanding a bigger cut of the pipeline deal than Unocal and the Bush Family were prepared to pay. In fact, the George W. Bush White House were continuing to negotiate with Osama right up to within a few weeks of the September 11, 2001 "terrorist" events supposedly instigated by Osama. [Knowledgeable sources believe a faction in the American aristocracy actually created the violence of September 11.] For related details, visit our website story, "The Pipeline Plots".

=== Danny Pearl, no fool, nevertheless trusted the Pakistan secret political police, the ISI, and Danny's bosses, to be in a position to know Danny's itinerary. A further fatal mistake, like Danny Casolaro made with his publishers, was to trust the Journal brass to know about the stories Pearl was developing about the Pakistan-India situation, about the possibility of a Journal story, bylined by Danny Pearl, about the resumed Afghan poppy production to flood Europe to raise much needed cash for the Kabul government. Danny Pearl, like the mindset of other mass media journalists, was not sufficiently skeptical of what the digging into these matters would trouble Daddy Bush and DUB-YA. After all, Daddy Bush and his cronies in the American CIA have created ISI and continue to dominate them. The new head of the Kabul government is Hamid Karzai, a consultant for Unocal/Bush on the pipeline deal. The Bush White House has appointed as Special Envoy to Kabul (not yet ready to receive a U.S. Ambassador) another Unocal consultant. === Danny Pearl trusted the Dow Jones/Wall Street Journal brass to know what Danny was doing which might tend to embarass the Bush White House. Would the Journal even agree to publish such items by Danny Pearl? === Off the record, some of Danny's colleagues at the Journal blame the two-faced higher ups for what happened to Danny. Outwardly, for public consumption, and to keep their jobs, his pals at the Journal go along with blaming "extremists" for the murder. A few of his pals have confided these matters to just a very few trusted persons pledged to never, never divulge the sources. Supposedly thinking himself clever, Danny Pearl was nevertheless in a position to understand these things just as Danny Casolaro knew, or was in a position to know, some of the matters he was poking into. Each of them, in their own way, made a series of fatal mistakes to advance, or attempt to advance their careers, financially and otherwise. An entirely independent-minded journalist, despite their talent, cannot expect or plan to have a well-fixed financial career, telling the truth, within and among the news-fakers with their conflicting interests. In plain English, writing and telling the truth would not get you rich. Can a candid populace expect a large circulation monopoly press Journal to print what is really happening? How many years will it take before the murders of Danny Casolaro and Danny Pearl are rightfully put at the door where the blame belongs, of America's secret political police and their assassin accomplices in the spy-riddled press? More coming. The Overthrow Of The American Republic - Part 7 The Murder Of Two Journalists Named Danny By Sherman H. Skolnick [email protected] www.skolnicksreport.com 2-24-2 Some, like this writer, prefer to call them collectively, the oil-soaked, spy-riddled, pro-British monopoly press. If you hope to be a well-paid functionary, within their circle, you better not mouth off like that, so employers, or would-be employers, link those stones as being hurled by you. Part of destroying the American Republic can be divided into two parts. [1] Ambitious types who want to get up the media ladder and are not that particular how. Especially, if they somehow, accidentally, or otherwise, become privy to data about high-level instigated political assassinations. Those include Dan Rather, Cokie Roberts, and Robert MacNeil

owner of the Robert MacNeil/JimLehrer News Hour on PBS Network. They have been part of the Big Lie, that President John F. Kennedy was murdered by a "lone assassin". [Visit our website story, "The Liars and Whores of the Press" and compare that to the lies in Dan Rather's book "The Camera Never Blinks", paperback reprinted 1988.] [2] Journalists who are in, or have ambition to be in, the monopoly press. One such was Danny Casolaro. He had great hopes of becoming financially well-off from a sizeable media publisher going with his book about "The Octopus", his title to tie together one giant criminal/espionage group of enterprises, including the following: ===The Inslaw Affair. There was a company with that name that had developed and owned the exclusive rights to software originally designed for federal prosecutors to manage their caseload, called PROMIS (pronounced PRO-MISS, not like PROMISE). Reagan Administration U.S. Attorney General Edwin Meese and other high-level White House officials had stolen the Inslaw software and re-sold it, secretly, to various foreign intelligence agencies, some friendly, some enemies or would-be enemies. In the process, they had built into it a secret "trap door", capable of sending out or up, signals to be monitored by the American CIA. This enabled American officials to spy on, and blackmail other intelligence agencies, including those in Canada, Sweden, Israel, Iraq, among others. === "The October Surprise". Running in 1980 under Ronald Reagan for President, was George Herbert Walker Bush, as Vice President. Daddy Bush was part of a scheme together with Bill Casey, campaign chief, later to be made Director of Central Intelligence. The trick? In September, 1980, to support the price of oil expected otherwise to decline, the Rockefeller Family instigated a war between two major oil producers, Iran and Iraq. The purpose was to prevent what happened later, drastically low prices for petroleum. The Reagan/Bush ticket was worried that their presidential election opponent, incumbent Jimmy Carter, would somehow, right before the November election, get the release of the 52 U.S. Embassy hostages held by Iran since 1979. That would enhance Carter's chances of winning in a recession year like 1980. Hence, the worry was about an "October Surprise". In October, 1980, in or near Paris, France, Daddy Bush worked a secret deal---clearly, treasonous---to reward top Iranian officials there meeting with him, to delay the release of the hostages until the Reagan/Bush ticket won the Election and was safely inaugurated. In January, 1981, at high noon, just as Reagan/Bush were inaugurated, the 52 hostages were released. The Iranian top officials had been paid off even before the Election, with clandestine weapons shipments to Iran via Portugal and trans-shipped through Israel. The Prime Minister of Portugal and another cabinet member there, disgruntled at what Daddy Bush got them into, were later assassinated by Bush's airplane sabotage murder team in the American CIA. (Recently, a hot topic in the Portugeuse press.) === The Iran-Contra treasonous dealings implicating Reagan/Bush and the new Director of Central Intelligence, Bill Casey. Reputed spy-agency operative, Bob Woodward, supposedly a writer for the Washington Post, posing as a priest, got into the hospital where Casey was ailing and may have had a part in what some contend was the murder of Casey in 1987. [For the spy background of Woodward, visit our website story, "The Grand Dragon of the Washington Post".] Members of Congress later admitted, off the record, that they had sufficient data to impeach Reagan, but hesitated, in view of the Nixon/Watergate example of a commotion. Danny Casolaro had come up with what he and his publishing industry confidants thought was the "smoking gun" of these and other details of the vast treasonous combine he labeled as "The Octopus". Casolaro's fatal mistakes? He trusted his findings and his notes of his interviews, and the outline of his planned book, too much to friendly-seeming spy-types who were supposedly aiding him in his book venture. Danny needed to be bailed out of his financial woes. He was too proud to continue thinking to get financial help from his brother, a Doctor. Danny Casolaro's mindset was entirely too much like a journalist thinking he was about to strike it

rich, nail down his career, within the monopoly media and CIA-aiding publishing field for books and magazines. Our examination of his notebooks causes us to reach what some might call an unfair conclusion about someone who can no longer respond to what we say. Danny seemed, at least from his notes, not to be sufficiently sophisticated to deal with this type of subject matter. On the other hand, circumstances that argue in favor of the idea that he was on the right track? That in the summer of 1991, in Martinsburg, West Virginia, he was "suicided". That is, murdered and made to look like a suicide. [In September, 1992, a Congressional Report on the Inslaw Affair, agreed that Casolaro was most likely murdered.] As we have written about the Rockefeller Family, they like to dominate states with sizeable geography and small populations, that also tend to be lawless, and where the Rockefellers can buy out and dominate the top state officials, such as West Virginia and Arkansas. Note that the great grandson of old John D. Rockefeller, founder of the infamous bloody Standard Oil Trust, namely John D. Rockefeller 4th, has been U.S. Senator from West Virginia. Senator Rockefeller's wife, Sharon Percy Rockefeller, plays a key role with NPR, which we call National Petroleum Radio and PBS Network. Once Arkansas Governor was William Rockefeller Clinton [elsewhere we explain why we use that as his middle name]. See our website series, "Wal-Mart and The Red Chinese Secret Police". So, if you have a business partner you want to get rid of, lure him, so you can conveniently have him knocked off with no investigation expected, some cynics contend, to Martinsburg. Danny Casolaro was embalmed apparently without an autopsy or informing his family of his death by the authorities in Martinsburg. Background data is in the book "The Octopus: The Secret Government and Death of Danny Casolaro" by Kenn Thomas [editor of Steamshovel Press and Magazine] and Jim Keith, hardcover, 1996. Danny Casolaro had come up with damning proof, possibly the smoking gun, showing Daddy Bush committed treason against the U.S. Constitution and the American common people. Danny was likewise tying up the details of the corrupt upper level of IRS officials shackled to and operating with the American CIA, to carry out treachery against the American people. Danny had secretly met in Martinsburg with some of his IRS sources. Did he drink too much while in that town and began bragging to others in a cocktail lounge? Some think so. To us, a comparable example is Danny Pearl, South Asia bureau chief of The Wall Street Journal. In a post-murder story in the Journal, he was described as "A skeptic of all institutions, from big government to big business...." Wall St. Journal, 2/22/02. Despite that description Danny Pearl was, or obviously had to be, a great believer in the monopoly press. Otherwise, what was he, a supposed "skeptic", working for a known financial industry faker and censorship machine like the Dow Jones & Co. unit, The Wall Street Journal? For example, tied like his brother Raul to major dope trafficking was Mexico President Carlos Salinas. The former Mexican strongman went on to become a DIRECTOR OF DOW JONES & CO. Sarcastic sorts wonder how much did it cost the reputed dope king to BUY such a Directorship? When it became too-well known about the dope cover up, Carlos Salinas apparently fled into exile in Dublin, Ireland. Sheepishly, the Journal tried to explain away his role at the parent firm, Dow Jones & Co. "Carlos Salinas, who is a board member of Dow Jones & Co., publisher of The Wall Street Journal, hasn't been charged with any wrongdoing." Quoting from The Wall Street Journal in "Left Business Observer", #68, March, 1995. Also see various Journal stories, such as 3/8/95. Several hundred stories about Carlos Salinas and the dope trafficking, are listed by search engine, www.google.com See, for example, www.narconews.com/salinasagain.html Also, Time Magazine, 2/10/97. As the Journal's South Asia bureau chief, Danny Pearl was well aware that the Bush Family were greatly implicated with the massive flow of drug trafficking from the poppy production in Afghanistan to the ethnic Albanian traffickers masquerading as the Kosovo Liberation Army, KLA, who according to law authorities are flooding Europe with dope. Bush Family cronies in the

American CIA have been supervising the KLA. [View our website series, "Greenspan Aids and Bribes Bush" and the attached documents showing hundreds of BILLIONS of dollars being washed through a Bush Family joint account with the Queen of England at her private bank, Coutts Bank London.] Like Danny Casolaro, Danny Pearl's fatal mistakes included the following: === Trusting the higher ups at the Journal, same ones that covered up for Dow Jones Director Carlos Salinas, to know what Pearl was working on as stories. Such as some of the following---Among the little known details, is that India was the subject of a beginning of the 20th Century pact, with complex provisions, to give up a portion of their territory by the advent of the 21st Century, to Afghanistan. This pact was worked out by the British, experts on divide and conquer. By 1948, the British decided to give up direct control of their colony, India, because ot the activist commotions of Mohandas K. Gandhi. For the benefit of the British, however, Gandhi was assassinated in 1948 and blamed onto "religious fanatics". Carved out of India territory by the British in 1947, was Pakistan, out of predominantly moslem areas of India. In the partition of India, the British created the perpetual irritant, Kashmir, to forever keep India and Pakistan fighting each other. Because of the century-old pact, removing some of the territory now called Pakistan, expiring more or less at the beginning of the 21st Century, Pakistan had an interest to dominate Afghanistan and their more or less lawless government in Kabul. About 1996, the Pakistan secret political police, Inter-Services Intelligence agency, the ISI, arranged for the Taliban to control Afghanistan with stringent and backward supposedly "religious" mandates. In 1997, Union Oil of California, Unocal, in which the Bush Family has huge financial interests, was part of a consortium of firms planning as a short-cut, to build a natural gas/oil pipeline from Central Asia across Afghanistan, to oil and natural gas-hungry Pakistan, India, and eventually, points east, such as Japan. Unocal invited top Taliban officials to be wined and dined at Unocal facilities in the Houston suburb, Sugarland, with Daddy Bush residing, among other places, in Houston. Unocal was getting set to train Afghans for the building of the pipeline. The problems that developed included Osama bin Laden and the Taliban demanding a bigger cut of the pipeline deal than Unocal and the Bush Family were prepared to pay. In fact, the George W. Bush White House were continuing to negotiate with Osama right up to within a few weeks of the September 11, 2001 "terrorist" events supposedly instigated by Osama. [Knowledgeable sources believe a faction in the American aristocracy actually created the violence of September 11.] For related details, visit our website story, "The Pipeline Plots". === Danny Pearl, no fool, nevertheless trusted the Pakistan secret political police, the ISI, and Danny's bosses, to be in a position to know Danny's itinerary. A further fatal mistake, like Danny Casolaro made with his publishers, was to trust the Journal brass to know about the stories Pearl was developing about the Pakistan-India situation, about the possibility of a Journal story, bylined by Danny Pearl, about the resumed Afghan poppy production to flood Europe to raise much needed cash for the Kabul government. Danny Pearl, like the mindset of other mass media journalists, was not sufficiently skeptical of what the digging into these matters would trouble Daddy Bush and DUB-YA. After all, Daddy Bush and his cronies in the American CIA have created ISI and continue to dominate them. The new head of the Kabul government is Hamid Karzai, a consultant for Unocal/Bush on the pipeline deal. The Bush White House has appointed as Special Envoy to Kabul (not yet ready to receive a U.S. Ambassador) another Unocal consultant. === Danny Pearl trusted the Dow Jones/Wall Street Journal brass to know what Danny was

doing which might tend to embarass the Bush White House. Would the Journal even agree to publish such items by Danny Pearl? === Off the record, some of Danny's colleagues at the Journal blame the two-faced higher ups for what happened to Danny. Outwardly, for public consumption, and to keep their jobs, his pals at the Journal go along with blaming "extremists" for the murder. A few of his pals have confided these matters to just a very few trusted persons pledged to never, never divulge the sources. Supposedly thinking himself clever, Danny Pearl was nevertheless in a position to understand these things just as Danny Casolaro knew, or was in a position to know, some of the matters he was poking into. Each of them, in their own way, made a series of fatal mistakes to advance, or attempt to advance their careers, financially and otherwise. An entirely independent-minded journalist, despite their talent, cannot expect or plan to have a well-fixed financial career, telling the truth, within and among the news-fakers with their conflicting interests. In plain English, writing and telling the truth would not get you rich. Can a candid populace expect a large circulation monopoly press Journal to print what is really happening? How many years will it take before the murders of Danny Casolaro and Danny Pearl are rightfully put at the door where the blame belongs, of America's secret political police and their assassin accomplices in the spy-riddled press? More coming. Stay tuned. Seldom are we reminded. Certainly not by the monopoly press. That those who rule us, do so ONLY with our consent. Without a line-up of tanks in the streets, without a declaration of martial law, this basic premise of the American Republic has been overthrown. By installing THEIR CHOICE to sit on the throne of power, a five-person military-style junta has nullified the Social Compact, the bedrock of America's organic Law, the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights. U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice Antonin Scalia, in Bush versus Gore, December, 2000, arrogantly proclaimed that Americans have no fundamental right to VOTE for President of the United States of America. Rather, he haughtily announces, we only have the limited right to pick Presidential Electors who, in turn, declare who is to be the occupant and resident of the Oval Office. Left out is that this procedure has become an automatic lever. With only the rarest exception, the Electors select the presidential ballot candidate to which they are pledged. Few voters are ever able to name or identify the "Presidential Electors", or where, if any place, the "Electoral College" meets in the December following a presidential election. In a time warp, Scalia, part of what some call "The Gang of Five", may well have sat on Hitler's Supreme Court and himself, later, brought to Justice by the Nuremberg War Crimes Tribunal. Considered by knowledgeable sorts as a sinister creature of Rockefeller's University of Chicago Law School, where he was a professor, Scalia as judge has failed to reveal in his mandatory annual financial disclosure that he represents the billion dollar stock portfolio of that oil-soaked edifice of the ruling class. And America's press whores, having become as infamous as those of the Third Reich, are not about to tell us there has developed a split in the American Aristocracy. [First, read "Captive Press in the Third Reich", by Oron J. Hale, paperback, 1964. Then, notice the frightening similarity in "The Media Monopoly: With a New Preface on the Internet and Telecommunications Cartels", by Ben H. Bagdikian et al., paperback, 2000. A press dictatorship, then as now.] SECTION ONE OF THE RULING CLASS

1. To divert attention from an expected financial meltdown, with George W. Bush as their agent, this faction intends to conduct, or is conducting, a "War Against Terrorism". Yet, a growing body of evidence shows there was prior knowledge, at the highest level, of Black Tuesday, September 11, 2001. AND, that the "Arabs", if any, were not principal players. This faction, if allowed, permitted, and condoned, to do as they wish, would bomb, blast, and attack, Iraq, Iran, Syria, North Korea, among others on their list of "enemies". 2. What worries this faction is not Baghdad's ability, or not, to launch diabolical weapons, if any, against the U.S. subject to massive retaliation. Rather, Iraq has incriminating documents, available to be disclosed to world opinion, proving the Bush Crime Family had been a private business partner with Iraqi strongman, Saddam Hussein, jointly conducting a huge financial shakedown, extracting in the 1980s a trillion dollars from the weak, oil-soaked sheikdoms of the Persian Gulf. And that the Persian Gulf conflict and War, 1990-1991, was simply a falling out of private business partners. The result of the War being some one hundred thousand U.S. casualties, in the form of strange illnesses, called Gulf War Syndrome of ex-GIs. Fifteen thousand of our military, not previously sick, died shortly after the end of the short conflict. Eighty Five Thousand are deathly sick, together with their wives, even their childen, and yes, even their dogs and cats. In public statements, the American Establishment has been, as to this, in total denial. [An unpublicized federal suit in Chicago dealt with the bank records of the secret partnership between the Bush Family and Saddam Hussein. See our website item "The Secrets of Timothy McVeigh" as to the records of Banca Nazionale Del Lavoro, BNL, Italy's largest bank, owned in part by the Vatican. Keep this in mind as to details of Section Two of the American Ruling Class.] 3. As historically true, dictators, or would-be dictators, cover up their financial failings by instigating wars. On occasion, they secretly create "enemies", such as by the American CIA, and then proceed to rally the nation to demonize and attack "them". Such as the Bush Crime Family while in business with the bin Laden Family including Osama who is NOT on the outs with his family. [Visit our website details about the Carlyle Group and others.] In plain terms, Hitler-types seek to cover up their evil by wrapping themselves in the flag and having the captive instruments of communications play "patriotic" war music. SECTION TWO OF THE RULING CLASS 4. How doyou stop an occupant of the Oval Office that your faction opposes? Someone, for example,that you secretly whisper or otherwise, and accuse, of being a "Communist" stooge, or soft on the Moscow regime? Well, you can, just after high noon, conduct a public execution, by military-style triangulating firing, blowing out his brains in an open car, part of a Presidential motorcade. And then, quickly blaming it all on a "lone assassin", a CIA-created patsy. There has sprung up since Dallas, November 22, 1963, about two hundred assassination researchers in North America (of which this writer is one). Their eagle-eyed scrutiny quickly flushes out dirty bloody business disguised as the work of "lone nuts". So the Texas-style JFK scenario does not work so well anymore. 5. Another sure-fire way is to take advantage of cracks in the financial wonderworks of a would-be dictator. That is, begin to publicly confront him and his gang with a series of financial horrors to which he is directly linked and by which his circle is financed. 6. George W. Bush and Richard Cheney, are directly linked to a whole series of financial scandals. Until he ran for Vice President, Cheney was CEO of Halliburton, the worldwide oil machinery octopus. Through their Dresser Industries unit, they supplied such items to Iraq, aiding them to unlawfully break the embargo. The Dresser unit has been controlled by Daddy Bush. In simple terms, they committed treason. They gave aid and comfort to someone they now contend (although previously their secret private business partner) is a sworn "enemy" of the United

States. Could they defend themselves by showing that with their aid and connivance, the American CIA created and nurtured Saddam as a convenient "enemy"? That is, that the Baghdad strongman has been created by agents of a section of the American ruling class? 7. George Bush the Younger is directly implicated in the dirty work of Enron. Their four thousand offshore "partnerships", kept off the books and more or less "secret", laundered the proceeds of illicit dealings---dope trafficking, gold smuggling, weapons shipments to "terrorists"----done by the Bush Crime Family. [For documented links to the Bush Family's 25 secret worldwide accounts, see our website series, "Greenspan Aids and Bribes Bush". Included there is the document, the Federal Reserve secret wire transfer, under the code of Fed Chief Greenspan, showing ONE HUNDRED BILLION DOLLARS laundered through the Bush Crime Family's joint account with the Queen of England at her private bank, Coutts Bank London. Recently, the Queen ordered a top official of her private bank to become an official of the Bush Family-linked Carlyle Group where Daddy Bush has been a paid consultant to the bin Laden Family, including Osama who is NOT on the outs with his family. "The Queen has a new bank manager, following the departure of Andrew Fisher, chief executive of Coutts, TO THE CARLYLE GROUP, the US private equity firm." Financial Times of London, December 19, 2001 (emphasis added.) As to Enron being closely aligned with the Federal Reserve: A Knight-Ridder newspaper chain story, breaking ranks with censorship of the monopoly press, had a story from their Washington Bureau, datelined Houston, headlined "Enron scandal touches Fed; Central Bank asked to save documents". March 7, 2002. Notice this: "Both Kenneth Lay and Jeff Skilling, former Enron chief executives, met with Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan and other staff members over the past two years, AND SKILLING SERVED AS A DIRECTOR FOR A FEDERAL RESERVE BRANCH BANK IN HOUSTON". (Emphasis added.) [See related details in our website Enron series. The Knight-Ridder chain story tends to in part corroborate our story about the Fed secretly siphoning off huge Enron funds to temporarily support the Dow Jones 30 Industrials as a psychological barometer.] 8. The second section of the Ruling Class consists, among others, of the French Rothschilds who for over two centuries have been the traditional bankers for the Vatican. And the Holy See is in a position, as a major owner of BNL (mentioned earlier), to have the documents of the secret partnership between the Bush Family and Saddam Hussein. 9. Little-known is that Arthur Andersen as auditors and consultants have had a client specialty, servicing enterprises run by prominent Catholics, particularly Irish Catholics. Traditionally, the senior partner running the law firm representing Arthur Andersen, has been R. Sargent Shriver, part of the Kennedy Family of Boston and Hyannisport. So is it more than just a coincidence? That to divert attention from Bush/Cheney and their direct complicity with Enron, that a few Catholic priests are scandalized as having many years ago sexually molested choir boys? These sudden disclosures have targeted Boston, Chicago, and Los Angeles, among others. Is it a coincidence, that these are centers of large numbers of voters for the Democrat Party and presidential candidates that are Democrats? The whispers about some priests have been going on for centuries. Why now? The monopoly press has trumpeted this story on signal. Such as Time Magazine's cover story, "CAN THE CATHOLIC CHURCH SAVE ITSELF?" April 1, 2002. [Visit our website story on Enron, Part 6.] 10. Another attack against Section One of the Ruling Class caused the bankruptcy of Global Crossings, implicating Bush/Cheney. Is it a coincidence that Arthur Andersen is in the middle of that? 11. Another attack on the financial underpinnings of the Bush Crime Family is the sudden attack on General Electric, contending defective book-keeping. Until now, with one exception, G.E. has been a sacred cow, not to be disturbed. But see what the Gore Family did to General Electric,

1961, in getting the head of G.E. jailed for Anti-Trust violations in the Electric Conspiracy Cases. See our website item, Enron, Part 5. G.E. financed Ronald Reagan, Daddy Bush, and Bush the Younger. G.E., by the way, financed the rise of Adoph Hitler. See, "Wall Street and the Rise of Hitler" by Antony Sutton. Also, the Bush Family committed treason in America, World War Two, for Hitler. See, "George Bush: the Unauthorized Biography" by Webster G. Tarpley et al., paperback, 1991. 12. The growing and evident split in the American aristocracy has to be considered from the historical standpoint of Protestant versus Catholic. A heavily documented recent book summarizes on its jacket, the work of the author "His labors have rewarded us with valuable new proofs of a vast Roman Catholic substratum to American history. Evidence suggests that Jesuits played eminent and under-appreciated roles in moving the complacent New Englanders to rebel against their mother country in 1776. Indeed, according to Saussy's discoveries, the American Revolution and its resulting constitutional republic may have been largely the outworking of an ingenious Jesuit strategy single-handedly designed and supervised by a true founding father few Americans have ever heard of---Lorenzo Ricci. With Ricci comes a whole host of hitherto little-known names such as Robert Bellarmine, Joseph Amiot, the Dukes of Norfolk, Daniel Coxe, Sun-Tzu, Lord Bute, Francis Thorpe, Nikolaus von Hontheim, and the Carrolls, Daniel, Charles, and John. 'In their way', writes Saussy, 'these men were as essential to our constitutional origins as Jefferson, Paine, Adams, Washington, Locke,and George III." "Rulers of Evil---Useful Knowledge About Governing Bodies", by F. Tupper Saussy, Ospray Bookmakers, Reno, Nevada, 1999. As the book points out, for a hundred years before it became a "federal city" and then District of Columbia, the land there was called "Rome". "Subdividing the federal city, or District of Columbia, into plats was the task of an artistic Parisian engineer named Pierre-Charles L'Enfant. According to Dr. James Walsh in his book 'American Jesuits', L'Enfant got the job through the intercession of his priest, John Carroll. L'Enfant was a Freemason. He subdivided the city in a brilliant array of cabalistic symbols and numerics." After detailing L'Enfant's cabalistic drawing of D.C. as an upside down pentagram, the book states "But L'Enfant's pentagram points downward, forming the shape of Baphomet, the gnostic 'absorption-into-wisdom' goat's-head icon of the Knights Templar. Gnostic historian Manly Hall says the upside-down pentagram 'is used extensively in black magic' and 'always signifies a perverted power.' The Baphomet imposed upon the federal city by Pierre-Charles L'Enfant puts the mouth of this 'perverted power' exactly at the White House." Saussy's book, pages 227-228. 13. Notice these details. A sizeable number of those occupying the World Trade Center towers on Black Tuesday, consisted of investment firms where the bulk of those working there were Irish Catholics and Jews. For example, the wholesale U.S. Treasury Security firm, Cantor Fitzgerald. Of the seven hundred there that morning, not a single one survived, primarily all Irish Catholics and Jews. Of the more than 300 New York firemen who died in the collapse of the towers, the bulk of them were Irish Catholics. Remember the Nazi-anti-Jewish background of the Bush Family. And the Bush Crime Family and their joint account for illicit purposes with the Queen of England. Do I have to re-invent the wheel of history, to prove the Queen is on the outs with the Irish Catholics? 14. Will the Split in the American Aristocracy become more and more evident? And will it be along religious lines, including Protestant versus Catholic? More coming. Stay tuned. Email This Article ==================================================