It's a good thing Britain followed Article 2 in 1918, saddling Germany with crippling debts and all the guilt, even though Britain was probably more responsible for the war.
There has been no mention of the Inquisition during the periods from the 1500's onward. This must have had an impact from then to date. In 1542 Paul III, Alessandro Farnese, Founded the Sacred Congregation of the Inquisition. It was in the beginning a temporary Institution, replaced by secular commissions under Pius IV, Gregory XIII, Paul V. But the first stable one, with an organic plan, was set up by Sixtus V, who had himself served as an Inquisitor in Venice and who, as Pope, ruled with Draconian severity; imposing the death penalty for thievery, incest, procuration, adultery and sodomy. It was he who planned with Phillip II of Spain to send the Armada against England and when the Armada was sunk, defaulted on the payments to his ally.
Pius X changed the name of the Holy office. Paul VI changed it again to the Doctrine of the Faith.
But the essential character of the Institution had not changed. It was still essentially authoritarian, repressive, penal, incurably secretive and, in its procedures inequitable.
Our tragic stories are interesting. But often the cause of tragedies is the greed, fear, and ambition of less-than-intelligent people. This includes the so-called elite. We need this analysis to understand today's reality. At the same time, we can't live in the past. The past will not lead us to a brighter future. Humanity needs the event of new dream. As I call it. A new, fresh idea of our existence, our nature. People must understand who we really are. We are not just the bodies of smart monkeys; something greater and brighter lies behind us. And even religion, because the elites, and most modern people, do not believe in gods. We need scientific evidence. After all, science now, too, and has always been a reflection of the commitment or faith of individuals in ideas (an almost religious formulation). I was looking for this new idea for us and I think I found it. https://www.academia.edu/129881990/Multiple_Singularity
On the 27th of October, 1941, President Franklin Roosevelt stood before a room full of Naval officers and bragged about a map, which he described as proof of Hitler’s expansionist plans for South America.
Just over a month before Pearl Harbor, FDR claimed that he had in his possession a secret document that vindicated his repeated warnings about the German threat to America’s sphere of influence and put the nail in the coffin of the isolationist camp in the US Congress.
Roosevelt’s secret map had been procured by agents of the British Security Coordination (BSC), a beachhead of UK intelligence based out of New York City, that purported to show how the Nazis intended to carve up South America among the Axis powers after the war.
Are you bashing FDR for the fault of being fooled by Churchill and MI6? Or are you saying that the USA should have not entered the war at all and the world would have been a better place if the Nazis had won WW2? Or are you saying that FDR was at fault for the British-managed creation of the CIA which occured 2 years after he died?
Darn, just the tone and reactive phrasing - "bashing?"
And then, the leading questions that have zero to do with the quote I put in here:
Man in the Castle I am not, friend.
And, sure, FDR has something to do with this creation of the CIA =
Roosevelt reacted enthusiastically and asserted that there should be the “closest possible marriage between the FBI and British Intelligence”. Stephenson returned immediately to report the good news to London and was just as quickly asked to take on the responsibility of presiding over the marriage himself. For the first time in his life, Stephenson balked.
In the meantime, the IIC had been dissolved and all special operations were transferred to a new entity called the Special Operations Executive (SOE). Together with the tectonic reshuffling of the British government that brought his friend Churchill back to power, Stephenson started to come around. Finally, the British Bulldog himself sat him down: “You must go”, Churchill ordered.
+--+
And accordingly, I am posting Silicon Icarus's most recent article, as a point of discussion, but saying, or implying that I wanted Nazi Germany to win?
Christ, I am an anti-fascist and anti-imperialist, so that sort of is sort of strange coming from you, Mr. Ehret. I cite some of your work in my journalism and in my Substack, as exemplary.
Your remarks are coming from serious misinformation. The quote that you have cited from FDR comes from exactly 2 sources: 1) William Stephenson, and his British establishment biographer and 2) the UK ambassador to the USA. I am aware that it has been so repeated that it has become like a gospel truth but like so many of these gossipy repeated lies, it is just that. Otherwise, you may not have been thinking that you were slandering FDR but you ignored the entire content of the essay and then latched onto one out-of-context item at the end and then criticized it using unexamined faulty assumptions and you didn't think about the implicit implications of your assumptions nor did you think about the ambiguities that your under-defined critique would create in the mind of anyone reading this quote which is why I asked the questions that I did in order to get you to clarify your remarks in order to zero in on your exact intention and identify what and where fallacies existed
What a fantastic read, thank you! The more I read the history of Europe, the more ignorant I realize I really am.
Thank you. 🙏🌹
It's a good thing Britain followed Article 2 in 1918, saddling Germany with crippling debts and all the guilt, even though Britain was probably more responsible for the war.
There has been no mention of the Inquisition during the periods from the 1500's onward. This must have had an impact from then to date. In 1542 Paul III, Alessandro Farnese, Founded the Sacred Congregation of the Inquisition. It was in the beginning a temporary Institution, replaced by secular commissions under Pius IV, Gregory XIII, Paul V. But the first stable one, with an organic plan, was set up by Sixtus V, who had himself served as an Inquisitor in Venice and who, as Pope, ruled with Draconian severity; imposing the death penalty for thievery, incest, procuration, adultery and sodomy. It was he who planned with Phillip II of Spain to send the Armada against England and when the Armada was sunk, defaulted on the payments to his ally.
Pius X changed the name of the Holy office. Paul VI changed it again to the Doctrine of the Faith.
But the essential character of the Institution had not changed. It was still essentially authoritarian, repressive, penal, incurably secretive and, in its procedures inequitable.
Our tragic stories are interesting. But often the cause of tragedies is the greed, fear, and ambition of less-than-intelligent people. This includes the so-called elite. We need this analysis to understand today's reality. At the same time, we can't live in the past. The past will not lead us to a brighter future. Humanity needs the event of new dream. As I call it. A new, fresh idea of our existence, our nature. People must understand who we really are. We are not just the bodies of smart monkeys; something greater and brighter lies behind us. And even religion, because the elites, and most modern people, do not believe in gods. We need scientific evidence. After all, science now, too, and has always been a reflection of the commitment or faith of individuals in ideas (an almost religious formulation). I was looking for this new idea for us and I think I found it. https://www.academia.edu/129881990/Multiple_Singularity
Humans need to cooperate. They no longer can, and it’s a miracle that complex systems are only half collapsing so far
https://libertyuncensored.substack.com/p/parasite-showcase-1-henry-heinz-alfred
Parasite Showcase 1 - Henry "Heinz" Alfred Kissenger
Globalists, Plutocrats and Satanists Revealed
Thanks for this homework assignment. I know a lot of history but the 30 years war is a kind of blank for me.
you don't really believe that rabin was murdered by this 'radical zionist fanatic' do you?
Very interesting, Matthew. Thanks for all the work you've done.
Oh, that FDR?
On the 27th of October, 1941, President Franklin Roosevelt stood before a room full of Naval officers and bragged about a map, which he described as proof of Hitler’s expansionist plans for South America.
Just over a month before Pearl Harbor, FDR claimed that he had in his possession a secret document that vindicated his repeated warnings about the German threat to America’s sphere of influence and put the nail in the coffin of the isolationist camp in the US Congress.
Roosevelt’s secret map had been procured by agents of the British Security Coordination (BSC), a beachhead of UK intelligence based out of New York City, that purported to show how the Nazis intended to carve up South America among the Axis powers after the war.
https://siliconicarus.org/2023/10/05/the-most-special-relationship-how-the-british-secret-service-created-the-cia/
Are you bashing FDR for the fault of being fooled by Churchill and MI6? Or are you saying that the USA should have not entered the war at all and the world would have been a better place if the Nazis had won WW2? Or are you saying that FDR was at fault for the British-managed creation of the CIA which occured 2 years after he died?
Darn, just the tone and reactive phrasing - "bashing?"
And then, the leading questions that have zero to do with the quote I put in here:
Man in the Castle I am not, friend.
And, sure, FDR has something to do with this creation of the CIA =
Roosevelt reacted enthusiastically and asserted that there should be the “closest possible marriage between the FBI and British Intelligence”. Stephenson returned immediately to report the good news to London and was just as quickly asked to take on the responsibility of presiding over the marriage himself. For the first time in his life, Stephenson balked.
In the meantime, the IIC had been dissolved and all special operations were transferred to a new entity called the Special Operations Executive (SOE). Together with the tectonic reshuffling of the British government that brought his friend Churchill back to power, Stephenson started to come around. Finally, the British Bulldog himself sat him down: “You must go”, Churchill ordered.
+--+
And accordingly, I am posting Silicon Icarus's most recent article, as a point of discussion, but saying, or implying that I wanted Nazi Germany to win?
Christ, I am an anti-fascist and anti-imperialist, so that sort of is sort of strange coming from you, Mr. Ehret. I cite some of your work in my journalism and in my Substack, as exemplary.
Ouch.
https://siliconicarus.org/2023/10/05/the-most-special-relationship-how-the-british-secret-service-created-the-cia/
Your remarks are coming from serious misinformation. The quote that you have cited from FDR comes from exactly 2 sources: 1) William Stephenson, and his British establishment biographer and 2) the UK ambassador to the USA. I am aware that it has been so repeated that it has become like a gospel truth but like so many of these gossipy repeated lies, it is just that. Otherwise, you may not have been thinking that you were slandering FDR but you ignored the entire content of the essay and then latched onto one out-of-context item at the end and then criticized it using unexamined faulty assumptions and you didn't think about the implicit implications of your assumptions nor did you think about the ambiguities that your under-defined critique would create in the mind of anyone reading this quote which is why I asked the questions that I did in order to get you to clarify your remarks in order to zero in on your exact intention and identify what and where fallacies existed