Dirty secrets of the Jewish Kabbalah

Below is video of probably the most revealing and rare exposés of the demonic Jewish Kabbalah, which constitutes the core of the New World Order conspiracy—the conspiracy against Christ and His Church. This is an in-depth four-hour series. I have not seen it anywhere else on the web. If you like the above graphic, please share it through social media, email, or other. Please also share the documentary linked below.

Secrets of the Kabbalah Revealed:

Part I

Part II

A response to Father Michael Ruskin regarding the Russia deception

Anti-Christian Soviet propaganda. Perhaps this rendering has dual meaning. On one hand, the Soviets portray the church as a religious snare, but on the other hand, perhaps they are crytpically telling Russians of the Soviet control of the Patriarchate of Moscow.

The following is in response to comments made by Father Michael Ruskin of Christ the Saviour Antiochian Orthodox Church of New Zealand to my open letter on the Russia deception.

By Timothy Fitzpatrick
July 5, 2018 Anno Domini

Dear Father Michael,

Your sobering reminder about the daily battle within ourselves is without a doubt the most important battle in our day-to-day lives. The Holy Scriptures warn us that the ultimate struggle is not with flesh and blood but with things of the spirit. How correct this is.

But let us realize that communism and its subsidiaries are not merely physical and political constructs with which to enslave humans beings. They are deeply spiritual—so much so that Patriarch Tikhon died to protect his flock from its spiritual perversion, not just its physical oppressiveness. It is not called “Godless communism” without good reason. In hindsight, Tikhon was justified in moving the Church into the catacombs, as the resulting Marxist churches (permitted by Lenin and the Soviets) that sprang up in both East and West (Vatican II) would evolve and attempt to replace the true one, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church. Prior to its Marxist infiltration, the Vatican also issued grave warnings about the communist threat. The Eastern and Western Churches were in complete agreement on this. But where are these warnings in the new Sovietized churches? No where. They don’t exist. Communism/Marxism is no longer a threat, they have us believing.

Is Putin doing anything more than Lenin in permitting the existence of the Sergian church in Russia and its subsidiaries in the West? Where is the rebirth of authentic Orthodoxy in Russia today? Shouldn’t this be reflected in Russia’s statistics, which have sky-high abortion rates, broken families, and essentially the same problems as the “evil” West? How many Russians even know of the Catacomb Church? In truth, both Putin and Lenin are responsible for the rebirth of the orthodox church—a Soviet mongrelized church. Patriarch Kirill follows the Sergian line of illegitimate succession, it seems. And lo and behold, Kirill is “former” FSB. During the Red Terror, the Soviets created schisms within the true Church and even honeypot “anti-Soviet” traditional churches to lure the flock to their deaths. How can we be sure Putin will not (perhaps he already has) do the same? Golitsyn claimed in the 1980s-90s that the crypto-Soviet power would offer concessions to the Church—effectively gambits—as part of its long-range strategy to woo social conservatives. And this is exactly what happened. In the following quote, Golitsyn speaks of the subversion of the Church.

“It fails to understand that greater apparent official tolerance of religion in the Soviet Union is accompanied by a secret drive to increase Party and KGB penetration of the Catholic and other churches and to use agents therein for political and strategic purposes inside and outside the Soviet Union. As part of the programme to destroy religion from within, the KGB, in the late 1950s, started sending dedicated young Communists to ecclesiastical academies and seminaries to train them as future church leaders. These young Communists joined the Church, not at the call of their consciences to serve God, but at the call of the Communist Party in order to serve that Party and to implement its general line in the struggle against religion.” (pg. 116, The Perestroika Deception)

Brother Maurice Pinay spoke in the 1960s of the same phenomenon of subversives entering the Catholic priesthood. It seems the same has happened in the Orthodox Church. Both Kirill and the Bishop of Rome, Pope Francis, are ecumenists who espouse communist views. This only corroborates Golitsyn’s warnings.

Golitsyn narrows down Russia’s false democratisation plot and concludes with,

“It is, however, a false, cosmetic liberalisation. For example, the alleged religious relaxation is a spectacle produced and managed by the KGB and the high priests of the church who are KGB agents assigned to fulfill the strategy…In the present phase, secret agents in the Catholic and other churches are being used to implement Communist strategy. When they achieve their Communist world victory, they will use mass withdrawal of their agents to disrupt and destroy the churches. Never in its history since Nero has Christianity faced such a threat of possible destruction. The dictum of the late Pope Pius XII about the incompatibility of Communism and religion is as correct as ever. The Vatican should reaffirm this dictum and should use its influence and its ‘divisions’ to defend Western values from the new Communist assault. (pgs. 189, 116-117)

Keep in mind that Golitsyn said all of this long before Kirill became patriarch. Can you honestly say to yourself that it’s a mere coincidence that the “tobacco” metropolitan happened to be pulled from communist ranks of the KGB?

The idea that the Russian Federation is the last bastion of Christian orthodox theocracy and, therefore, must defend itself is a wonderful one, but it does not stand under scrutiny. Firstly, many proponents of this perceived Russian-theocratic state point to the number of NATO military bases surrounding Russia as an indication that Russia is not an aggressor but is, instead, only acting defensively. But they can’t seem to explain how this supposedly superior Western-led NATO military occupation couldn’t manage to stop Russia from annexing Crimea, much less retaliate. Aside from a few show sanctions imposed by then U.S. President Obama (a secret communist himself) and other Western nations following the annexation, we didn’t so much as see a budge from a single NATO tank in response. Why? The only two conclusions one can come to is that NATO and the West are not militarily superior to Russia and her allies or, worse yet, the two sides are in on the charade together. Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty has been invoked only one time, following the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks—provoking a Western-led military campaign in which Russia acted quite passively, even endorsing the U.S. narrative of things. Is NATO really anything more than just a show army designed to trick Westerners into thinking the communist threat is being dealt with while the threat actually becomes stronger? I fear this may be the case, especially seeing as the Soviet plan involves dismantling NATO by subversion, not by guns—the same way the Church is being co-opted.

In the spirit of Lenin and his living student Aleksandr Dugin, defenders of Russia point to the infectious moral decay of the West and how this legitimizes Russia’s social and geopolitical manoeuvrings. While this is true about the West’s moral decay, these defenders don’t seem to be asking themselves what the motive is behind these charges. It’s one thing to point out immorality from a Christian perspective but quite another to point it out for strategic reasons. Is Russia portraying the West as evil because it is truly evil or is it doing so to weaken its morale? I can’t count how many Westerners I have seen cheering on Russian (Soviet) penetration of the West thinking it will destroy globalism. How ironic and twisted. These same also fail to acknowledge the large Soviet hand in furthering the moral decay of the West. Soviet penetration of Western governments is one thing, but when you have Soviet penetration of the education system, it becomes all the more obvious how we got to where we are today. The Western counter-culture revolutions of the 1960s were largely hatched in the Soviet Union. Are we supposed to forgive and forget all of this because the media has shouted from every rooftop that communism has fallen? And why should we trust the media, when it is part of the morally decayed West? Think about how we learned of the fake collapse of communism: from Western media. If the “evil” West truly hated “orthodox” Russia, you would think they would have been a little more prudent in assessing the validity of the purported fall of communism. Why was it immediately accepted without any kind of investigation? The crypto-Soviet empire of Russia is playing a classic globalist dialectic of creating the problem: cultural Marxism in the West, and offering the solution: neo-Bolshevik one worldism led by Russia.

Father Ruskin, you claim that the European Union is collapsing of its own volition, but consider that Europe’s largest economy resides in Germany, whose head Angela Merkel happens to be a “former” Soviet. It’s reasonable to say that Germany sets the tone for the EU. All Russia would have to do to manipulate the EU is have at least one rogue EU state under its control; although, I am sure it’s actually more than just one. Germany fits this hypothesis. It could be said that Merkel is the single biggest saboteur of EU migration norms. With Merkel being a communist in the service of the crypto-Soviet Union, it seems that “Russia” is leading the campaign to de-Europeanize Europe. Yet, we are being told the opposite by Western Russophiles. Is it just a coincidence that Dugin’s Eurasian utopia concept is consistent with Kalergi’s Pan-European utopia?

As for Putin’s so called social conservatism, Russia recently has just had its first legal same-sex marriage. Russia’s decades of strategic corruption of Western mores has finally returned to its master. It’s now only a matter of time. And blaming the West will be invalid, as the Soviet Union was pretty much the birthplace of the sexual revolution. In their occultic vision, the serpent’s head has reached its tail.

Your concluding statement, “It’s drawing a long bow to suggest they resurrected the Church to lull us into a false calmness before deceptively overwhelming us,” describes what Golitsyn explains as failed Western analysis of the Soviet threat. And as the above quotes show, this is exactly the kind of sophisticated enemy with which we are dealing. This is not about fearing the Kremlin and its diabolical plans but about discerning it…in righteousness.

Respectfully yours,

Timothy Fitzpatrick

Michael Hoffman’s infatuation with Protestantism

By Jude Duffy
November 26, 2015 Anno Domini
Part I

Untitled-1Michael Hoffman, the revisionist writer, clearly regards it as one of his missions in life to shift blame for the rise of “Christian” usury from Protestantism to the Catholic Church. In many articles and books Hoffman has asserted that Protestants, specifically Calvinists, have been unjustly scapegoated for usurious hegemony in the west. Hoffman’s method of argumentation on his website and elsewhere is to simply ignore facts that don’t support his thesis of Protestants as radical foes of usury. Thus he ignores or downplays the huge and well documented role of Calvinists and other Protestants in the rise of modern industrial usurious capitalism – a role modern Protestants and philo-Protestants not only admit, but brag about (1). He also ignores, or attempts to explain away, some central facts of post-Reformation history, such as, for example, the rise of great usurious Protestant capitalist powers in the centuries after the Reformation.

For example, Britain as a fanatically Protestant polity, became the world’s leading usurious industrial power in the post-Reformation age. Moreover overseas territories settled by Protestant Britons likewise eagerly embraced usurious capitalism (2). In this context it must be noted that since the Whig sponsored Dutch Orangeist conquest of England, it has never had a Catholic monarch or Prime Minister.

Anglo-usury and Anglo anti-Catholicism went together. The United States, another capitalist superpower with a long history of anti-Catholic persecution and discrimination, only got its first Catholic president in 1960, and we know what happened to him. The all-pervasive hatred of Catholicism that characterised both the British Empire, and to a lesser extent, the U.S., makes the idea that some form of subtle or subliminal Catholic influence explained these nations’ fervent embrace of state-sponsored usury bizarrely far-fetched.

Why, in any case, would Protestants, especially radical Protestants, obediently follow the lead of the hated Papists in something so fundamental, especially since the whole point of the Reformation was revolt against Rome? The question gains even more force when one remembers the central pivot of Hoffman’s thesis: the notion that during the Renaissance the Catholic Church broke with the teaching of the Medieval Church on financial matters, and that disgust at Catholic financial corruption partly drove the Protestant “reformers”. How likely was it that Protestants who rebelled against Rome, in part because of perceived financial corruption, and who repudiated apostolic succession and many ancient dogmas of the faith, would blindly sign up to a new anti-Christian financial dispensation, simply because their religious arch-enemy had already done so? If they revolted so violently against ancient teachings of the hated Papists, and went on an iconoclastic altar and statue smashing rampage across great swathes of Europe to prove the point, why on earth would they eagerly embrace newly minted Catholic teachings – unless, that is, such alleged new teachings dovetailed with their own materialistic agenda?

hoffman2In an exchange on his blog, Hoffman noted that when Calvin endorsed usury, several prominent Puritans, including John Cotton, reproved him. Far from admitting the obvious implication of this statement, which is that the founder of the most successful radical Protestant sect decisively broke with the anti-usury traditions of Christendom, Hoffman attempts to argue that it proves the anti-usury outlook of many radical Protestants.

Not only is this highly disingenuous – Calvin defined the spirit of radical Protestantism far more than John Cotton did – but it also points to a more profound misapprehension on Hoffman’s part. He seems to be believe that the tendencies of Reformation and post-Reformation radical Protestantism can be illustrated simply by citing anti-usury writings and sermons of some prominent Puritans. Thus is if a prominent New England Puritan like Cotton condemns loan-sharking, this for Hoffman proves that the Puritans cannot be blamed for the rise of usurious capitalism. This is grossly simplistic on several levels.

First of all condemnations are one thing – actions are quite another. When it comes to the Catholic Church, Hoffman attaches no credibility whatsoever to the post-Renaissance Church’s many condemnations of usurious capitalism and freemasonry. According to him, all such condemnations amounted to nothing more than cunning and hypocritical ploys on the part of Rome, to disguise its true occultist-usurious agenda. On the other hand he takes all the statements by early Protestant leaders condemning usury or Judaic corruption completely at face value – even when they come from the mouths or pens of men such as Luther, who condoned all forms of sin including lying, and enthused about occult practices such as alchemy (3). Emotionally and spiritually, then, Hoffman is anything but a detached unbiased scholar when it comes to evaluating the merits of post-Reformation Catholicism on the one hand, and early Protestant movements on the other.

Another problem with cherry-picking anti-usurious or anti-Judaic statements of early Protestants is that this type of reductionism often fails to take note of the underlying trends at work in historic political or religious movements. For example, if most 1960s liberals had been asked what they thought of same sex unions, the vast majority of them would have said they deplored such a grotesque idea, and that social conservatives who suggested otherwise were simply scare-mongering. Indeed as recently as 2012 Barack Obama claimed to be opposed to “gay marriage”. Yet when the American Supreme Court ratified this evil sham in June 2015, the U.S. President celebrated by lighting up the White House with the colours of the LGBT rainbow flag. Revolutionary movements aren’t always open about what their true endgame is, and sometimes aren’t even sure themselves, so their past statements are by no means an infallible guide to their future actions.

Hoffman himself spots subtle “gradualism” everywhere where Rome is concerned, but ignores much more glaring examples of the phenomenon in the history of Protestantism. Thus he cites Pope Leo’s Papal Bull “Inter Multiplicis” as beginning the gradual process of abandonment of the Catholic Church’s prohibition against usury, but denies that Calvin’s much more definitive embrace of usury played a decisive role in the rise of loan-shark hegemony.

Unfortunately for his thesis, the historical facts speak for themselves. Protestant and Jewish families shaped the modern financial system in Britain and its dominions (including Ireland), and in the U.S., Prussia, Switzerland, Scandinavia and elsewhere. Even in predominantly Catholic nations like France, Protestants were at the heart of usurious banking. The rhetorical hostility of certain Puritans to usury does not in any way negate the huge role radical Protestants played in the rise of the usurious state, any more than the opposition of certain traditionalist Anglicans to “women priests” proves that Protestants have had no truck with feminism.

The Reformation unleashed forces which at least some of its devotees neither encouraged nor desired, but as with early social liberals, this in no way absolves the reckless “reformers” from blame for the predictable consequences of their revolutionary pride. That pride made it inevitable that greed and the love of money would follow in the wake of their revolution.

The usurious spirit cannot be divorced from liberal pridefulness generally – it is interwoven in the fabric of modern post-Catholic culture. If love of money is the root of all evil it is because money facilitates the commission of all other sins Rebellious pride was at the very heart of Protestantism from Luther to Henry VIII to Thomas Cromwell, from to John Calvin to Oliver Cromwell. That incidentally is why Whiggish Neo-conservatives, including pseudo-Catholics like Michael Novak, are such philo-Protestants: they grasp, in a way that seems to completely elude Hoffman, that the Reformation was the beginning of the modern revolutionary capitalist age. Those early Protestants who condemned usury did so because they still lived in post-Catholic post Medieval culture, just as the 1960s liberal who condemned sexual promiscuity, or abortion on demand, still lived in a world informed by vestigial Catholic morality.

Yet another problem with Hoffman’s approach to evaluating early Protestant statements on usury is his own definition of Puritanism. There is more than a touch of the “No True Scotsman” fallacy at work here, whereby Hoffman defines a Puritan as any radical Protestant who happens to meet his definition of what a good Christian should be. Thus when objectors point out that many Protestant denominations directly descended from Puritan sects – Congregationalists, low church Anglicans, Unitarians, and so on – pioneered a worldly liberal approach to moral issues, including usury, Hoffman blithely denies that such sects have any claim on the Puritan name (4). He adopts a similar form of circular logic in attempting to address the incontestable evidence that many of the pioneering usurious banks in Britain, New England, Geneva and elsewhere were owned by Calvinists or Puritans, or their descendants. A Puritan in his parlance is simply the type of Protestant who agrees with him on religious, political questions.

For example he says that to accuse Puritans of liberal tendencies is to adopt an “elastic” definition of Puritanism. But Puritanism WAS elastic in most matters religious – apart, that is, from its hatred of Catholicism. Modern Whigs revere Oliver Cromwell because, like them, he loathed the Catholic Church, but not so paradoxically also embraced an early form of ecumenical liberalism, and tolerated many Protestant sects – ranging from Anglicans to Independents to Presbyterians and Unitarians – sects that disagreed with each other on many things, but shared a deep hatred of Catholicism. In other words liberals find Cromwell a congenial figure because his religious views don’t differ significantly from their own, and can be summed up as “ARBC” – Any Religion But Catholicism”.

The political and social authoritarianism of early radical Protestants should not blind us to this truth: Puritans were elastic in terms of religious dogma, but nonetheless deeply inflexible towards those who challenged their spiritual and political authority. In this they foreshadowed the modern left and the modern Neo-cons, who change their mind on a sixpence, but are utterly ruthless in their repression of dissent. Not so very long ago Communists persecuted homosexuals as bourgeois degenerates; now their hard left ideological descendants persecute critics of homosexual “marriage” as hate criminals. Like communism, with which it shares certain traits, Puritanism never lacked in fervour and authoritarianism – what it lacked was any coherent concept of moral and spiritual authority.

Notes:

(1.) Lagrave, Christian, “The Origins of the New World Order”, Apropos Journal, No. 29, Christmas 2011. This invaluable essay (translated from the French original), lays bare the pivotal role of British Reformation and post-Reformation Protestantism in the development of the NWO. As the late great Solange Hertz used to say: when it comes to tracing the roots of Judaeo-Masonic global tyranny, “all roads lead to London”.

(2.) Anger, Matthew, Chojnowski, Dr. Peter, Novak, Fr. Michael, “Puritans Progress: An Authentic American History”, Angelus Press, 1996. The role of Protestants in the rise of Anglo-American usurious capitalism is glaringly obvious; so glaringly obvious that it’s well nigh impossible to take seriously an argument based on denying or downplaying this central fact of American history. Furthermore writers such as the late Professor Anthony Sutton have documented just how steeped in occultism and corruption the Anglo-Protestant self-anointed “elite old-line” American families were and are. See his book, “America’s Secret Establishment: An Introduction to the Skull & Bones”, Liberty House Press, 1986.

(3) Muggeridge, Anne Roche, “The Desolate City: Revolution in the Catholic Church.” Harper, San Francisco, 1985.  For more on Luther’s proto-Reichian sexual revolutionary tendencies, see also Dr E. Michael Jones 1993 Ignatius Press book, “Degenerate Moderns; Modernity as Rationalized Sexual Misbehaviour”.

(4) In an exchange with the author on Hoffman’s blog, “On The Contrary” in May 2015, Hoffman categorically denied that any Protestant who endorses sexual libertinism can legitimately be called a Puritan. In truth at the time of the Reformation, Catholics viewed the “Reformers” as dangerously indulgent on sexual matters. Hoffman is correct in saying that the idea of  the Puritans as strait-laced dour ascetics is a distortion, but it’s a distortion that, in a certain measure, works in Protestantism’s favour – tending as it does to obscure just how much the original Puritans had in common with modern liberals. If the Puritans were “joyless”, that joylessness stemmed from their materialist rationalism, rather than from the stringent nature of their creed.

(5.) Fahey, Fr. Denis, “The Mystical Body of Christ In The Modern World”, Browne & Nolan, Dublin, 1935. Even in an overwhelmingly Catholic country like Eamonn de Valera’s Ireland (over 95 per cent Catholic in those days), all of the major financial institutions were in the hands of Protestants or Jews. The same applied to most big commercial and industrial concerns, and to the Irish media. The role of exiled French Huguenots in advancing the Industrial Revolution, and in the rise of British usurious banking is well known – although, to the best of my knowledge, Hoffman largely passes over it.

(6) Lagrave: In his aforementioned essay, “The Origins of the New World Order”, Lagrave quotes the Scottish historian/philosopher David Hume’s description of Cromwell as in practice a religious “indifferentist” when it came to the various Protestant sects – a man who sought to form a united anti-Catholic international front of all the denominations, regardless of their doctrines. Indeed, such was his indifferentism many continentals believed him to be a Freemason. Whatever the truth here, it is certain that Cromwell’s policies dovetailed uncannily with those of “the Craft”. In modern times Neo-cons and other Zionist stooges on left and right are the most ardent members of the Cromwell fan club. Tony Blair keeps a bust of the vile old hypocrite on his desk. Perhaps we shouldn’t be surprised at one mass murderer revering another.

Part II
Part III

Freemasonry unmasked by traditional Catholic

Goy Guide to World History

By Doctor E. Michael Jones

Part I

Part II

 

 

Christian anti-Judaism contrasted with anti-Semitism

Christian J. Pinto: Zionist espousing, what else, Jesuit conspiracy theories

Christian J. Pinto Zionist Judaizer CalvinistBy Timothy Fitzpatrick

Since the displaced Jews of Spain and Anterp provoked the Protestant Reformation, there has been no end to the number of conspiracy theories that the Roman Catholic Church, the longtime enemy of Jewry, has supposedly been involved in.

These age-old lies, in the face of all the evidence to the contrary, still pervade popular thought throughout Protestant and conspiracy circles. Documentary filmmaker Christian J. Pinto of Adullam Films pulls out all the tired old slanders against the Church—all for the advancement of the Jewish-Protestant alliance in their goal of setting up a one-world millennialist kingdom unto their false messiah, ironic considering Pinto claims to oppose world government.

Lies and disinformation

Pinto carefully crafts conspiracy intrigue and Christian Zionist—specifically puritan-based—heresies into a neat little package in his films. Pinto draws in conspiracy enthusiasts through his film Secret Mysteries of America’s Beginnings and The Hidden Faith of the Founding Fathers, which show the Masonic origins of the founding of the United States of America—the new land being a fulfillment of the occultist fantasy of manifesting mystery Atlantis. Where Pinto can’t ignore the Jewish roots of America’s beginnings with the guiding magical wands of cabbalists Francis Bacon and John Dee, he attempts to neutralize the truth by diverting attention back to Jesuits-are-subverting-the-world conspiracy theories, which are specifically drawn out in his other films  A Lamp In the Dark: The Untold History of the Bible and Codex Sinaiticus: The Oldest Bible? Or a Modern Hoax? But even fellow Protestants can’t agree with Pinto and his wild Jesuit conspiracy theories. Reviewer Cris Putnam writes,

The film is centered on the idea that Codex Sinaticus or “Sinai Bible” was actually created as part of a Vatican conspiracy to undermine biblical inerrancy. I agree with Pinto and others that the Vatican has a vested interest in undermining Sola Scriptura and have argued vigorously that the Bible contradicts Rome’s theological traditions. So the idea is that Rome conspired to forge a Bible that differs significantly from the reformation efforts is plausible. However, Pinto’s conspiracy has huge gaping hole that seems fatal.
After watching the film and hearing Greek New Testament scholar Dan Wallace’s response, I am unconvinced that Codex Sinaticus is a forgery because the conspiracy is fundamentally incoherent. There’s no discernible pay off for the conspirators. The movie did not present any evidence that modern Bibles help Catholic theology in any meaningful way or undermine inerrancy. In fact, I think the opposite is true.  The problem for the Tares Amongst the Wheat thesis is that Codex Sinaticus is just as caustic to Rome’s traditions as the King James Version.  You would think that if Rome were going to concoct a forgery they might include something about Mary or purgatory but this is not the case. Where’s the payoff for Rome? (Source)

jesuit-conspiracy

The cover of one of Pinto’s propaganda CDs which he sells for $14.95 at his website.

Pinto a Zio-Calvinist heretic

Pinto is your typical Zionist shill accusing the Vatican of everything the world has know for 500-plus years that the Jews are responsible for. Make no mistake, the Vatican is now an agent of the Judeo-Masonic conspiracy, thanks to Jews and masons subverting the Church, especially during the buildup to the Protestant Reformation and the French Revolution, culminating in the Jewish-sponsored Second Vatican Council in the 1960s. But the true Church remains within the fractured Vatican as well as in the Eastern Orthodox Church. Protestantism has and always will be a Jewish perversion, a cheap imitation of the Church of Christ, right down to the sexually depraved Waledensians and Albigensians, whom Pinto specifically defends, giving away his puritan bias. In all of Pinto’s supposed unmasking of the freemasonic conspiracy, nowhere does he talk about the masonic hand in infiltrating and perverting the Vatican, as outlined in the Alta Vendita,or about the Jewish-Masonic orchestrating of the French and Russian Revolutions. As for the Jesuit order, it too was infiltrated by the Jewish-Masonic power structure in Europe, not the other way around as Pinto suggests. He ridiculously asserts that [pre-Vatican II] Rome and the Masons work together or, what’s more absurd, that Rome founded freemasonry. Incidentally, some of Pinto’s supposed online detractors accuse him of being a secret Jesuit agent and a Calvinist, even though Calvinism is considered utter heresy by the Vatican. Let’s not forget that Calvinism is as Jewish as they come, with it’s kabbalistic dualism, not to mention suspected Jew John Calvin being helped by Jews during the Reformation. In fact, Jews were the leading proponents of popularizing Christian heresy in the Middle Ages and thereafter as revenge against Christ and the Church. It’s difficult to tell who is more intellectually dishonest, Pinto or his strawman detractors. But they are correct that Pinto is a Calvinist. Historian E. Michael Jones expounds on the Jewish revolutionary spirit behind Calvinism and the Protestant Reformation:

The accusation that Protestants were Jews was not new. Calvin claimed an opponent “called me a Jew, because I maintain the rigor of the law intact.” Others claimed the Genevan reliance on “jure gladdi,” the law of the sword, to suppress dissent made Calvin “a Jew.” Calvin was a lawyer before he became a reformer; his reliance on the law to micromanage the minutiae of everyday life reminded many of Jewish proscriptions in Deuteronomy and Numbers. His notion that idolatry should be uprooted by military force was consistent with the Anabaptist reading of the Old Testament. His approach was a more refined, more sophisticated, and more legalistic appropriation of the Old Testament than the version that had inspired the Anabaptists in Muenster and the Taborites in Bohemia. The idea Calvin was a Jew or he was working for the Jews was, therefore, not new or far-fetched….

Luther, Zwingli, and Calvin were all students of Nicholas of Lyra, a Franciscan monk of Jewish descent who lived in the 14th Century. Nicholas got his ideas from Raschi, who was the conduit that allowed the Talmud scholarship of his father, Isaac of Troyes, to flow directly into Protestantism. Reuchlin was another conduit. When Pfefferkorn accused Reuchlin of being in the pay of the Jews to disseminate propaganda, the essential truth of the charge caused Reuchlin to issue a violent denial in his pamphlet Augenspiegel.  (E. Michael Jones, The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit and its Impact on World History, Fidelity Press, South Bend, Indiana, 2008. pp. 340-341)

Is he shilling for the masons?TauEpsilonPhi

We know Pinto deceives his audience about the origins of Freemasonry and America. Freemasonry is a Jewish institution from A to Z, or more accurately, from Aleph to Tav. This is undeniable. Pinto doesn’t dispute this fact, he simply ignores it. Could this deception be due to Pinto’s own masonic affiliations? His Adullam Films production company produced A Lamp In the Dark at Pat Roberton’s Northstar Studios. Robertson, a notorious Christian Zionist and fake opponent to the New World Order, has long been suspected of being a freemason and is affiliated with the Illuminati-funded Trinity Broadcasting Network (chock-full of masons) through his own network Christian Broadcasting Network (CBN). The term Adullam, referred to in the Old Testament, has Judeo-masonic implications by contemporary uses of the term. Pinto’s heretical DVDs are sold across the net, even on, guess who, Alex Jones’ online media empire. Jones, an ardent Zionist and suspected freemason, promoted Pinto in 2009 on Infowars and PrisonPlanet. Pinto is also promoted by fellow Judaizers Joseph Farah (World Net Daily) and David Bay (Cutting Edge Ministries). Bay is actually the executive producer of some of Pinto’s films.

What’s most interesting of all is Pinto’s membership with Jewish-created fraternity Tau Epsilon Phi, whose membership boasts of Dwight D. Eisenhower, Jewish Agenda 21 technocrat Ray Kurzweil, and a whole host of anti-Christian Jewish entertainers, like Larry David, creator of Seinfeld, and Jerry Springer. The fraternity even developed an award in Pinto’s honour.

It seems Pinto’s revelations about the masons are 10o per cent certified kosher, which means he is allowed to expose them to a certain degree.

Judaizing

Protestantism and Zionism go hand in hand. Afterall, wasn’t that the ultimate goal of the Jews who provoked the Protestant Reformation…? To create a Crypto-Jewish front to wage war with Christ and His Church—in the name of Christ Himself. How clever. Pinto’s documentaries Megiddo: The March to Armageddon Bible Prophecy & The New World Order are as kosher as anything from the mainstream Christian Zionist pulpit, headed by stooges like John Hagee, Pat Robertson, and Jack Van Impe. There are no smoking guns in his films. His prophetical views ring of the old puritanical millennialism, which has since been refined by modern heretics like Cyrus I. Scofield, the father of modern Christian Zionism. Jones writes of the Jewish purpose for the Puritan heresy,

Viera’s reading of the end times got Menasseh thinking how he could use millennial expectation among the Puritans to Jewish advantage. So Menasseh encouraged these ideas among the English Puritans as a way of “furthering the ends of Jewish Polity.” Menasseh’s Politieia is the same as that of Maimonides. Its worldly nature and its existence in time stand out against the general Christian concept of the ‘Kingdom of the Spirit.'” He was both Marxist revolutionary and Zionist rolled into one, which Fisch recognizes when he links Menssaseh…. (Jones, p. 448.)

By the way, Pinto suggests that communism is a Vatican creation, showing his complete lack of basic history. To him, Jew commie Karl Marx was only a secondary player at best. It’s quite the shift in facts. It’s as if Zionist shills like Pinto make a list of all the crimes of Jews and switch the name of the perpetrator with whomever they want to indict.

site-of-first-synagogue-after-resettlement-c-1657

The Judaization of England following the purging of Catholicism. The result of the the rotten fruits of apostate King Henry VIII, Anne Boleyn, John Dee, and Oliver Cromwell. So much for the Byzantine Solution.

Anyhow, the establishment of the Puritan movement was Jewish through and through. It helped the Jews remain in England despite heavy opposition following their mass influx into the country and a previous banishment edict by King Edward I in 1290. The Puritans passed off wild tales as Bible prophecy in order to convince England that its millennial fever was warranted (not unlike the millennialist fever of dispensationalism today) and would become the New Jerusalem. These tales culminated in the modern heresies of premillennial dispensationalism (futurist eschatology) and its many variants, which was brought to the New World along with Judeo-Masonic cryptocrats. Incidentally, the leading proponents of the transplanted Jewish-Puritan millenarianism were either Jews, Zionists, Masons or all three—men like John Nelson Darby, Cyrus I. Scofield, Charles Taze Russell, and Dwight L. Moody. Jones argues that Protestant movements such as the Hussites, Albigensians, Waldensians, and Puritans were more revolutionary than they were about correcting the perceived perversions of the Catholic Church, and he documents the role played by Jews in each of these movements.

Graetz similarly protrays the Reformation as “the triumph of Judaism,” a claim that many Catholics made in Luther’s day. Graetz applauds Luther’s early defense of the Jews…describing Luther’s sentiments as words “which the Jews had not heard for a thousand years. They show unmistakable traces of Reuchlin’s mild intercession in their favor. many hot-headed Jews saw in Luther’s opposition to the papacy the extinction of Christianity and the triumph of Judaism. Three learned Jews went to Luther and tried to convert him. Enthusiastic feelings were aroused among the Jews at this unexpected revulsion, especially at the blow dealt the papacy and the idolatrous worship of images and relics; the boldest hopes were entertained for the speedy downfall of Rome and the approaching redemption by the Messiah.”

Walsh claims the “stormiest preachers” of the Reformation were “of Jewish descent.” Michael Servetus, the first Unitarian, was influenced in his attack on the Trinity by Jews. Calvinism became a “convenient mask” for Jews in Antwerp after their expulsion from Spain, confirming that Protestants were half-Jews and adding to the suspicions of Catholic leaders. Dr. Lucien Wolf claims, “Marranos in Antwerp had taken an active part in the Reformation movement and had given up their mask of Catholicism for a not less hollow pretense of Calvinism. The change will be readily understood. The simulation of Calvinism brought them new friends, who, like them, were enemies of Rome, Spain, and the Inquisition. It helped them in their fight against the Holy Office, and for that reason was very welcome to them. Moreover, it was a form of Christianity which came nearer to their own simple Judaism. The result was that they became zealous and valuable allies of the Calvinists.” (Jones, pp. 268-269)

Further evidence of Pinto’s pandering to Jewry is apparent in another of his films, The Kinsey Syndrome, which I wrote about in depth a few years ago. In it, Pinto teams up with Jews Judith Reisman and one of his regular co-producers Joe Schimmel (Zionist Christian) in blaming the entire sexual revolution on Hitler and the Nazis. The film conveniently uses gentile window dressing in the form of pervert Alfred Kinsey to cover up the fact that the modern sexual liberation movement is a specifically Jewish movement. Throughout the film, one can hear the term “Judeo-Christian” thrown around as if it has validity, and like Pinto’s obsession with the Jesuits, he narrows his focus on the Nazis this time. Nazi conspiracy theories are another favourite disinformation tool of the Judeo-Masonic elite. Not only do they throw people of the scent of Jews behind many world crimes, they victimize the Jews over and over, as a means of creating a gentile guilt complex. Furthermore, Pinto’s portrayal of the Vatican is disingenuous. He is taking cheap shots at a Vatican that is not her former self. She has been infiltrated and corrupted by Jews and Masons.

a-american-flag-jew-atrocitiesMost prominent evangelical ministries in the United States are cointelpro operations, not to mention tax-exempt organizations that must follow the policies of the Zionist-controlled US government. Pinto is yet another Jewish proxy to add to the list. Unfortunately, many will likely be taken in by his lies, as he does tell some truth about the masons and the occult. That’s the gambit, the bait, the decoy. Half truths. The fact of the matter is, the Jewish conspiracy theory is as old as the Crucifixion of Christ, even talked about in the Bible, and there is far more evidence to back it up than either Jesuit or Nazi conspiracy theories. The Nazi involvement in the conspiracy against Christ and His Saints has been insignificant next to that of Judaism and freemasonry.

Twietmeyer correctly identifies History Channel’s alien agenda but misses bigger picture

Replacing Christ and His Saints with Lucifer and his fallen angels, who pose as ETs.

Replacing Christ and His Saints with Lucifer and his fallen angels, who pose as ETs.

By Timothy Fitzpatrick

University of Rochester engineer Ted Twietmeyer suggests that a covert government group is behind the History Channel‘s anti-Christian alien agenda most prominently carried out through the television series Ancient Aliens.

Jeff-Rense-is-a-filthy-race-traitor-who-has-aligned-himself-with-enemy-Jew-Gordon-Duff-against-the-White-Race.jpg

Alternative media personality Jeff Rense.

The article, posted Feb. 22, 2014 on Jeff Rense’s website, warns us of signs that an alien ET presence is about to be announced by authorities and gives a list of reasons of why this is likely to happen. It’s apparent that Twietmeyer believes in at least the possibility of the existence “aliens”, as far as being space beings, which is in line with Jeff Rense’s track record of posting ancient astronaut-friendly and New Age articles on his popular alternative news website. While it is disappointing to see the alternative media continuing to perpetuate the Judeo-Masonic lie of ET existence (they are really fallen angels), at least Twietmeyer sees a conspiracy behind the Illuminati-run History Channel‘s incessant airing of Ancient Aliens episodes, re-runs and new alike.

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA

Ted Twietmeyer

History Channel 2 has been airing, day and night over and over for several years a show called Ancient Aliens. Many episodes have been re-run countless times. Some episodes date back about 10 years, so this is not a new show. What advertiser would fund endless re-runs of the same show? Perhaps it is a covert group, funded by the government.

Twietmeyer makes a good observation here but then loses focus. He goes on to say that the recent mass ammunition purchase by U.S. Homeland Sekurity is evidence that the government is preparing for a mass hostile alien invasion.

Some congressman have gone public voicing their concerns, but soon they went silent. It appears a invasion is expected. Purchasing billions of rounds of ammunition goes way beyond putting down any civil rebellion. If the power grid is taken down for years, then no more ammunition will be manufactured.

But Lucifer will likely come in on a platter of peace (no, not the Evangelical’s imagined seven-year peace treaty based on a misinterpretation of Daniel’s 70 weeks). That’s what one worldism is purported to be: an era of peace, tolerance, and brotherly love—the same cries of freemason Enlightenment revolutionaries. Twietmeyer is correct that science fiction movies often portray a doomsday scenario, but not Ancient Aliens. The Satanic lie advanced in every episode of Ancient Aliens is that the alleged space beings are merely our benevolent creators cryptically trying to tell us of our true origins and our unlimited human potential through all the world’s myths, legends and religions. Ancient Aliens presents the New Age lie that all religions lead to the same path, which is to our alleged alien origins. The only need for goverment mass ammunition purchases would be to prepare to pierce the bodies of those who do not accept the new alien-led world government, the Novus Ordo Seclorum, or Olam Ha Ba to the Jews.

Twietmeyer concludes,

Clearly the government expects something very, very big to happen. Everything the US government does is usually planned ahead about 5 years. Some of these measures being taken appear to indicate we are nearing the end of the preparation period. And with it will come the end of the brainwashing cycle. When alien shows disappear from television, the indoctrination period will be over and a announcement about aliens will be made.

What is he saying here? Are aliens a government conspiracy of some kind or are government’s covering up alien existence while preparing for what they perceive as a legitimate alien invasion? Twietmeyer is not clear about where the conspiracy begins and end or who is orchestrating it. In reality, the government is complicit with Lucifer and his fallen angels, who pose as ETs. Even the Ancient Aliens‘ episode “Aliens and the Founding Fathers” admits that the United States was founded on Luciferian beliefs with the help of fallen angels (ETs). It even reveals the Judeo-Masonic tradition of the U.S. founding fathers and the Masonic geometry of Washington DC’s streets and government buildings.

Twietmeyer finishes his article posing some questions:

1. How will people react when the announcement is made that we already have resident aliens? Or that one or more alien races have already taken control of Earth?

People will react to it as a revelation, not as an invasion. Remember, the deception lies in the fallen angels portraying themselves as space-derived beings who dabbled with genetic manipulation to create us Golem-like human beings, thus usurping the God of the Bible.

2. Will the on-going History Channel awareness program, and other programs like it such as Alien Files and Uncovering Aliens finish the job of increasing the population’s belief in aliens? If so, then people will quietly accept a permanent loss of freedom and sovereignty. Uncovering Aliens is the hardest-hitting show to date, with a very serious tone and agenda.

Courtesy of AZL.

Courtesy of AZL.

Yes, the ongoing alien agenda of the History Channel and Jewish Hollywood will increase the population’s belief in the ancient astronaut theory. It already is. As he says, the show is extremely popular. It’s one of the longest running series on the History Channel. But, again, the revelation of “aliens” to the world will be perceived as a religious experience, not a hostile takeover. The revelation will occur at the apex of the United Nations’ campaign for Agenda 21 global government. Sovereignty will not be needed under this global government. (See Ancient Aliens fulfilling Albert Pike’s prediction of Luciferian one-worldism)

3. What measures will governments take in North America and Europe take just before the announcement is made? Video projection technology to create a fake Messiah in the sky has existed for over 20 years. For those who are unaware of this happening, they may think Jesus Christ has returned. Technology also exists for people to hear inside their heads what they will perceive as God.

The way the public is currently buying up the lies told about Christianity through the 300-year Judeo-Masonic plot against Christ and His Saints, a Project Bluebeam scenario is likely not even necessary. The great apostasy will finish off Christianity, the Vatican and Protestants will continue their descent into modernity and obscurity, Zionism will appear to die off and morph into its technocratic, alchemical destiny, and the world will finally embrace one-world Luciferianism. This is the purpose of the alien agenda.

4. In Christianity, it is believed that when everyone is resurrected “not a hair on the head will be lost.” It is well known that some races are already taking human DNA from countless abducted humans and created new beings. Is this what resurrection really is about?

Twietmeyer seems to be falling for the alien agenda lie that Christianity is really just another way through which our alleged alien creators have been trying to communicate to us. Is a fake apocalyptic Christian-themed scenario even needed in order to deceive the masses, who will have had the idea of Christianity ripped from their minds by this time? It seems unlikely. Those who advocate the existence of space aliens are dupes perpetuating the Satanic ancient astronaut fraud.

Sovereign/Freeman movement is a dead end

Is that a hidden triple six embedded in the Freeman society's new age-looking logo?

Is that a hidden triple six embedded in the Freeman society’s new age-looking logo?

By Timothy Fitzpatrick
There is much appeal to the so-called sovereign, or freeman on the land, movement. It shows its adherents that there is a vast monetary conspiracy which holds the citizens of the planet in perpetual bondage and that there is a procedure to remove oneself from this.

While it is true that there is a global conspiracy ruled by money, the sovereign movement, which has its roots in the WASP establishment, doesn’t stop there and eventually takes its followers down a path of deception and ruin.

For years, I held back on advocating for or against this sovereign movement, with the intention of giving it time to prove itself. It has failed miserably and ruined the lives of many well meaning people. How sincere persons fall for this deception is apparent in the near-truth appeal of the freemen on the land. Yes, there is a global economic conspiracy. Yes, there is no law in the United States that requires one to pay income tax. Yes, the common law is a suitable law for a civilized society. But it is foolish to think, as the movement’s adherents do, that one can escape this monetary matrix simply by writing a series of homemade letters to state officials and the Queen of England or arranging words in such a way as to declare independence from the system when facing a magistrate.

The sovereign citizens movement claims that the conspiracy is based in Universal Commercial Code (UCC) or that we, as artificial corporate entities called ‘persons’, are actually governed by Maritime admiralty law (the law of the seas). The fact that our names are written in all upper case letters on government documents is the alleged proof that we are merely corporate instruments traded within the UCC system. While these codes certainly allow for control of good and services as well as people, they are not the root of the conspiracy. And publicly declaring oneself independent of this system has no effect whatsoever, as has been proven by the repeated failures in the courts by sovereigns. Afterall, the lawmakers and their interpreters (lawyers) can get away with interpreting laws in any way they see fit. The Bible declares that the love of money is the root of all evil. Evil…is at the root of the monetary conspiracy. The only way to declare oneself independent of this evil system dominated by monetary instruments is to repent of ones sins and follow Christ, who is the liberator of mankind from the bondage of sin. The sovereign movement offers an illusory salvation through its system, which is based on letter writing and language manipulation. Sovereigns are doomed to a life of, at worst, jail time or, at best, a life of constant fighting to declare oneself independent. Spend enough time around a sovereign and you will see that much of their time is taken up by summons to court or learning the latest letter-writing technique (there is always “new light” to be learned since their methods always fail in a court of law). Adherents are always kept in a state of delusion. When they inevitably fail to convince a judge of their independence from admiralty law, they are comforted by another sovereign and advised that they simply didn’t use the right combination of words to secretly tip off the judge as to the sovereign’s true freedom.

The sovereigns point out that the City of London is a separate corporate entity. They claim that the UCC law, under which every man and woman is supposedly enslaved, is run by the British Crown in conjunction with the Vatican. Much of this speculation is fueled by Jewish disinformation of a Vatican/Catholic world conspiracy. This is a strategic deflection carefully crafted by the Elders of Zion. The Crown is certainly a big part of the world conspiracy, but remember that Jewry took over England shortly after Henry VIII’s bastard daughter Elizabeth and her court astrologer John Dee cast a spell over England, allowing for all kinds of evil to flourish. England became the new Jerusalem to the Zionist millennialists. And while the Vatican has become corrupt, especially since the Second Vatican Council, it is not a key player in the world conspiracy. The function of the now Jewish- and homosexual-infiltrated Vatican is to water down the Christian faith, to modernize and scandalize it. In reality, Talmudic Judaism and its money-changing disciples are the masters of money on Earth. They are headquartered in London, New York, and in other places and are not limited by the incorporation of cities, municipalities, or persons. They are not limited by codes or laws, and especially not letters of declaration (sovereign’s supposed claim of right) or language manipulation. The world’s modern courts system, based on interpretation and legalism, resembles something based in the Jewish Talmud and Kabbalah (the late Eustace Mullins makes some plausible claims about the courts and Kabbalah; Michael Hoffman, in Judaism Discovered, makes clear connections between the modern legal system and the Talmud). The British Crown can only be an extension of this kabbalistic system. It’s certainly no secret that most judges are Freemasons—Freemasonry being a Britishized from of Jewish cabalism. A branch of the sovereign movement called the redemptionist movement, founded by Roger Elvick, touches on the Jewish aspect of the usury/debt slave system, but fails to see its spiritual relationship: that we are enslaved by evil men (led mainly by Jews) through usury and debt but that our own personal sin and abandonment of God makes this enslavement possible, not our lack of knowledge of techniques and procedures.

If true liberation from bondage comes from knowing Jesus Christ, then the freeman movement is not only providing a false solution to the problem of bondage and slavery, it is affirming it by diverting its followers form the real answer. So delusional are the sovereigns, they naively believe that we were somehow free when only the common law existed, even though usury and sin still prevailed. Considering the sovereign’s unconscious affirmation of slavery and bondage, it’s no surprise that many sovereigns take their “enlightenment” to extremes, like using their letter procedures and statements of claim to get out of paying bills, everything from utilities to cable and phone. The rotten fruits of their deception finally evolves from its pseudo-liberating theology to outright theft.

Another rotten fruit exhibited by sovereigns, and as indicated by the Freeman society logo above, is their new age, communitarian tendencies. To justify their theft, sovereigns will often claim that no one holds ownership over anything (Judeo-Masonic goal of abolition of private property); therefore, everything is for the taking for the sovereign. Many sovereigns will use Christian-like language in order to deceive new recruits of their benevolent motive. They will mix it in with new age concepts of oneness and mother earth. Is it any surprise that Zionist shill and occultist Jordan Maxwell is a leading advocate of the sovereign movement?