domingo, 20 de diciembre de 2009
jueves, 26 de noviembre de 2009
the Neocons' agenda
Until when our Catholic bishops, would be the neocons target of the Media and the Press? Few people are aware that the “Williamson’ affair, it’s the tip of the iceberg of a more broad conspiracy to dismantle the Church’ holiness. “Omnes alios hostile odium,” Tacitus on the Jews. In fallowing from the Zionist’s agenda; there are some laws (in the USA), that protect them from any single intent from part of a well informed catholic, to denounced all hostiles aspects of the “neocons against crimes committed tu the human race, either present or past:
1) Any assertion “that the Jewish community controls government, the media, international business and the financial world” is anti-Semitic.
2) ”Strong anti-Israel sentiment” is anti-Semitic.
3) ”Virulent criticism” of Israel’s leaders, past or present, is anti-Semitic. According to the State Department, anti-Semitism occurs when a swastika is portrayed in a cartoon decrying the behavior of a past or present Zionist leader. Thus, a cartoon that includes a swastika to criticize Ariel Sharon’s brutal 2002 invasion of the West Bank, raining “hell-fire” missiles on hapless Palestinian men, women and children, is anti-Semitic. Similarly, when the word “Zionazi” is used to describe Sharon’s saturation bombing in Lebanon in 1982 (killing 17,500 innocent refugees), it is also “anti-Semitic.”
4) Criticism of the Jewish religion or its religious leaders or literature (especially the Talmud and Kabbalah) is anti-Semitic.
5) Criticism of the U.S. government and Congress for being under undue influence by the Jewish-Zionist community (including AIPAC) is anti-Semitic.
6) Criticism of the Jewish-Zionist community for promoting globalism (the “New World Order”) is anti-Semitic.
7) Blaming Jewish leaders and their followers for inciting the Roman crucifixion of Christ is anti-Semitic.
8) Diminishing the “six million” figure of Holocaust victims is anti-Semitic.
9) Calling Israel a “racist” state is anti-Semitic.
10) Asserting that there exists a “Zionist Conspiracy” is anti-Semitic.
11) Claiming that Jews and their leaders created the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia is anti-Semitic.
12) Making “derogatory statements about Jewish persons” is anti-Semitic.
The State Department criteria has serious implications for anyone alive today. The most serious is that it turns many Jews, who have made many of the above claims in books and articles they have written, into anti-Semites. But the State Departmen’s definitions have serious historical implications as well. If we take numbers 4 and 7 for example, it seems clear that not just ordinary Catholics but Catholic popes and saints were guilty of anti-Semitism, according to the State Department’s criteria. Numerous popes beginning with Pope Gregory IX in 1238 have condemned the Talmud as a blasphemous assault on the person of Christ and the Christian faith and have urged Christians to confiscate and burn it. Concerning #7, St. Peter, the first pope claimed in the Acts of the Apostles that the Jews were responsible for the death of Christ. Even Nostrae Aetate, the declaration of Vatican II on the Jews which ushered in an era of good feeling and “ecumenism” claimed that some Jews were responsible for Christ’s death. By their promiscuous use of the term anti-Semitism Rickman and his cohorts in the State Department have turned traditional Catholic teaching into a hate crime.
http://www.culturewars.com/2006/Conversion.htm, gene546
1) Any assertion “that the Jewish community controls government, the media, international business and the financial world” is anti-Semitic.
2) ”Strong anti-Israel sentiment” is anti-Semitic.
3) ”Virulent criticism” of Israel’s leaders, past or present, is anti-Semitic. According to the State Department, anti-Semitism occurs when a swastika is portrayed in a cartoon decrying the behavior of a past or present Zionist leader. Thus, a cartoon that includes a swastika to criticize Ariel Sharon’s brutal 2002 invasion of the West Bank, raining “hell-fire” missiles on hapless Palestinian men, women and children, is anti-Semitic. Similarly, when the word “Zionazi” is used to describe Sharon’s saturation bombing in Lebanon in 1982 (killing 17,500 innocent refugees), it is also “anti-Semitic.”
4) Criticism of the Jewish religion or its religious leaders or literature (especially the Talmud and Kabbalah) is anti-Semitic.
5) Criticism of the U.S. government and Congress for being under undue influence by the Jewish-Zionist community (including AIPAC) is anti-Semitic.
6) Criticism of the Jewish-Zionist community for promoting globalism (the “New World Order”) is anti-Semitic.
7) Blaming Jewish leaders and their followers for inciting the Roman crucifixion of Christ is anti-Semitic.
8) Diminishing the “six million” figure of Holocaust victims is anti-Semitic.
9) Calling Israel a “racist” state is anti-Semitic.
10) Asserting that there exists a “Zionist Conspiracy” is anti-Semitic.
11) Claiming that Jews and their leaders created the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia is anti-Semitic.
12) Making “derogatory statements about Jewish persons” is anti-Semitic.
The State Department criteria has serious implications for anyone alive today. The most serious is that it turns many Jews, who have made many of the above claims in books and articles they have written, into anti-Semites. But the State Departmen’s definitions have serious historical implications as well. If we take numbers 4 and 7 for example, it seems clear that not just ordinary Catholics but Catholic popes and saints were guilty of anti-Semitism, according to the State Department’s criteria. Numerous popes beginning with Pope Gregory IX in 1238 have condemned the Talmud as a blasphemous assault on the person of Christ and the Christian faith and have urged Christians to confiscate and burn it. Concerning #7, St. Peter, the first pope claimed in the Acts of the Apostles that the Jews were responsible for the death of Christ. Even Nostrae Aetate, the declaration of Vatican II on the Jews which ushered in an era of good feeling and “ecumenism” claimed that some Jews were responsible for Christ’s death. By their promiscuous use of the term anti-Semitism Rickman and his cohorts in the State Department have turned traditional Catholic teaching into a hate crime.
http://www.culturewars.com/2006/Conversion.htm, gene546
viernes, 20 de noviembre de 2009
El Concilio Vaticano Segundo y la crisis de la Fe
Al cierre del concilio, en 1965, todos los católicos del mundo esperábamos una renovación espiritual en la Fe, como nunca antes se había visto en los siglos anteriores. Nuestra esperanza era que, nuestro Señor Jesucristo, reinaría y seria homenajeado por todas las naciones del mundo, especialmente, en el hemisferio occidental. Para nuestra desgracia, tal esperanza, se convirtió en una desilusión jamás vista en los dos mil años que tiene de fundada nuestra iglesia. La tesis central del concilio fue que, se necesitaba modernizar, a la iglesia, conforme a las demandas que el mundo secular exigía. Los “peritos” del concilio (casi todos ellos liberales) argüían que deberíamos volver a las raíces litúrgicas apostólicas; pero nuca explicaron cuáles eran esas “raíces”. Los resultados de tales cambios o mejor dicho: de discontinuidad tradicional, son de todos conocidos. La Fe de los creyentes cayó de tal forma que, la asistencia a la nueva liturgia es de un 30%, comparado a un 85% de asistencia la liturgia tradicional. Si Dios lo permite, posteriormente, abordaré los problemas doctrinales del Concilio Vaticano Segundo que, creo yo, han sido las razones fundamentales para que tantos católicos haiga caído en la “indiferencia” religiosa… (Perdida de la Fe en la Iglesia Católica). Conclusión, la tesis del concilio se ha convertido en la antítesis de la renovación espiritual anhelada por todos los católicos. Gene546
Suscribirse a:
Entradas (Atom)
