Argentine Cardinal Bergoglio elected pope. Chooses the name Francesco I (Francis I).  So much for all those who have prognosticated the Apocalypse Pope Petrus Romanus (will be interesting to see how they spin it now).

Posted in

Joseph P. Farrell

Joseph P. Farrell has a doctorate in patristics from the University of Oxford, and pursues research in physics, alternative history and science, and "strange stuff". His book The Giza DeathStar, for which the Giza Community is named, was published in the spring of 2002, and was his first venture into "alternative history and science".


  1. Frankie Calcutta on March 15, 2013 at 7:38 pm

    I wonder which St. Francis he is referring to? Possibly the new Pope’s job is to tell the world the Vatican has been robbed clean and the once mighty and rich Vatican is now meek and penniless. In this case I would bet he is naming himself after St. Francis of Assisi, who gave up his wealth to live a life of poverty and service. That would explain why Ratzinger stepped down. Too big a job for an old man, and he would be met with scorn as some of the thievery may have happened under his watch.

    Or, the new Pope could be naming himself after St. Francis Xavier, one of the Jesuit founders who once requested the papacy to send the Inquisition to the Portugese colony in Goa, India where he was a missionary. The Pope obliged and the dishonest and debauched maranos, who were leading the the colonists and natives astray, had the screws put to them. I always wondered why Xavier did this considering he established the Jesuit Order with the help of several maranos such as Ignatius Loyola. Maybe when he discovered the evil machinations of these maranos, he was livid and wanted bloody revenge? I also believe there was a Venice connection to the founding of the Jesuit Order but I might be mistaken.

    My guess is the new Pope will be leading the new Inquisition in Rome and beyond and has named himself after St. Francis Xavier. His background sort of suggests this:


    Possibly the first victim of the Pope’s Inquisition Drones will be Jamie Dimond of JP Morgan fame followed by some of the scoundrels working in the Vatican Bank.

  2. rich overholt on March 15, 2013 at 3:46 am

    A jesuit from Argentina. Uff da!

  3. mccartichoke on March 14, 2013 at 11:13 am

    I came in late, and am curious: what is Dr Farrell’s take — or any informed source — on Malachy’s Prophecy of the Popes and Horn’s book, briefly? I am familiar with both. Thanks to anyone who can fill me in!

    • DownunderET on March 14, 2013 at 2:56 pm

      Go to the Byte Show and download Dr. Farrell’ interview with George Ann Hughes called……….


      • mccartichoke on March 14, 2013 at 4:19 pm

        Thank you so much, ET. That was a great help. Happy St. Paddy’s, early or not!

  4. paul de gagne on March 14, 2013 at 7:25 am

    I slept on the thought of the ‘Un-civility’ that occasional pops up in here.

    It’s mostly from newcomers to this site or new kids on the block. They come and go. In this Postmodern Age where peoples’ interests are constantly shifting or changing like the weather finding new thrills, intellectual or otherwise, then moving on rather than not bothering with deep explorations is the thing to do. (I guess when one is on thin ice the best strategy is to skate – REAL FAST!

    Yeah, lets all just skim the surface like a flat rock coasting on water rather then indulge in any really meaningful deep underwater diving by calling each other names such as babycakes! It’s safer that way or is it?

    I just looked up the word ‘SHILL” on quack-a-pedia just to refresh my memory.

    One very long sentence got my attention > “Shill, can also be used perjoratively to describe a critic who appears all-to-eager to heap glowing phrase upon mediocre offerings, or who acts as an apologist for glaring flaws.”

    Mediocre offerings? How does one come to this determination of Farrell’s works by just quickly scanning them or giving them the ‘once over’ rather than spending a good worthwhile amount of time covering them. (besides, Farrell works are more like a combination of other revelant authors in the field or sometimes a synthesis of his own claims.)

    Does that make me a shill or some kind of groupie for saying this?I don’t think so. Maybe there’s some truth to the apologist’s approach but it’s not what you think?

    Is it a ‘glaring flaw” to examine age old questions that are so vague or dim in their real nature as to be Unanswerable? Yes, there are mountains IMPOSSIBLE to climb but sometimes ‘We pretend we can climb them and You know what – we end up with a higher reach than we initially thought we could do if we hadn’t attempted. (yeah, one gets knocked down the hill just like that unfortunate fellow pushing the rock up the mountain but so what. The fun is in the game and in the moment (Consciousness) the stone or rock begins to tumble back down the hill. Kind of like a Jack and Jill nursery rhymn or tale for mature adults, ha, ha!)

    Maybe HEIGHT is the wrong word. Maybe DEPTH is more like it as Jung suggests— “Go down into the Valleys?

    One more thing about the Vatican that is important in this Breakaway Civilization business. Perception management is most definitely a vital element of this kind of Organization. I would advise (uncalled for of course, ha, ha!) someone(?) to look at the Vatican’s Department of ” The Propagation of the Faith” if they want to learn about how maybe all this PR business or SHILL marlarky came to be?

    Have a great St. Paddy’s Birthday this coming Sunday. I’m going to a Irish Celebration and dinner this afternoon where a bunch of Italians and Peurta Ricans will celebrate being IRISH, ha, ha! (did you know they (politically correct crowd) tried unsuccessfully to ban the Shamrock from being displayed in SOUTH BOSTON because they call it a racist symbol. Boo-who on that…. If they are going to ban something than ban the Confederate flag. That would make more sense!)

    • Robert Barricklow on March 14, 2013 at 10:41 am

      By the Bye, enjoy your posts.
      Speaking of St. Patrick, I just got through reading a biography on Ripley, Believe It or Not! Turns out he got alot of ink for saying that St Patrick was never a Saint & wasn’t even Irish to boot! I wonder if he’d be taken to task here. He wanted to be called a liar. It was good PR. In fact, his was the only business he knew, where the customer was always wrong.
      Keep those hits coming, paul de gagne.

  5. DEBRA on March 13, 2013 at 8:23 pm

    And now comes Tom Horn, from his Facebook page:

    “Furthermore, in naming himself after Assisi, Bergoglio branded himself after an Italian priest whose original name was Francesco di Pietro (Peter) di Bernardone — literally, Peter the Roman.”

    Mr. Horn definitely regards the announcement of Pope Francis as a positive fulfillment of “Petrus Romanus.:

    • DownunderET on March 13, 2013 at 8:28 pm

      Why wouldn’t he, he’s got nowhere else to go.

      It’s what this new guy is going to do that interests me, I mean now that he is infallable, sorry inflatable, I wonder how big is his ego.

      Just imagine not being able to be wrong, it’s just a miracle I tell ya.

      • MQ on March 14, 2013 at 2:37 pm

        Yeah, it’s even better to be VOTED infallible (by a bunch of fallible guys, let that sink in for a moment).
        As for Horn, I’m sure he had several logical contortions lined up for any of the candidates had they been announced as pope. The guy with a hammer sees everything as a nail. Of course the Italian cardinals screwed it up by email announcing being happy that the guy from Milan became pope. D’oh!

    • Charlotte Knight on March 13, 2013 at 9:56 pm

      Yep, in my views spinning definitely happnening here faster than the speed of light….

      Figures that Tom Horn “sees” the newly elected pope this way…as being Petrus Romanus…after all (sorry for my sarcasm and skepticism), Horn has a lot of book sales and even more so his reputation riding on BEING RIGHT about his interpretations of Vatican happenings and the Malachy prophecy. (almost as if Horn is the prophet here)

      It is possible that the name choice Francis was more related to this new pope’s reputation for having chosen to lead a simpler life and his reported concern for the poor.

      Check out Horn’s Raidersnewsupdate website for more “about how he is right” related to all this. Also having skimmed some of his earlier articles, he had A LOT of other bases covered as well, including mentioning a number of other cardinals who had Peter in their names and whom he considered prime papal candidates.

      Time will tell. I hope if he works to move things in more positive directions he doesn’t get offed.

    • amunaor on March 16, 2013 at 1:05 pm


      So we have, not only an infallible, but a very stealthy Peter the Roman Jesuit, gathering the flock together.

      Here’s another tidbit put up on CommonDreams:

      Dirty Wars: Pope Francis’ Ties to Argentina’s Rightwing Junta
      Bergoglio twice refused to testify in court about his role, was accused by lawyers of being evasive.

  6. Robert Barricklow on March 13, 2013 at 4:07 pm

    Seems too “normal”. Too much like Benedict.
    He’s also one year younger than Benedict, and was picked second to him, in the last “election”.
    Too simular, yet a resigniation of the first?
    He allegedly took the buses & cooked his own meals. Well, he’d better line-up a few tasters, becuase processed food is unhealthy…

    • DEBRA on March 13, 2013 at 4:58 pm

      Two back-to-back Nazi’s on the Throne of Rome? hmmmm

  7. johnycomelately on March 13, 2013 at 3:18 pm

    A conservative pious Italian Jesuit from Argentina who was the Archbishop of Rome , boy oh boy….

    Peter the Jew came to Rome from afar and now Bergoglio comes to Rome from afar.

    These guys are certainly playing to the script, this guy is the proxy lamb that will be led to the slaughter, a genuine scapegoat, with the red cloth to boot.

  8. Luso on March 13, 2013 at 2:44 pm

    Let play with numbers, then.
    The date is a curious one: 13-3-2013. There are some 13 in there…
    A question: at what local time in Washington DC (Temple, Southern Jurisdiction) when the new Pope was announced?

    • JHM on March 13, 2013 at 6:06 pm

      I was just writing to Mr. Farrell on the date thing, may i copy that here?

      13. 3 (european sytle date) 133 x2 – 266.
      he is the 266th pope.

      dte complete, european style format:
      full circle

      Inauguartion mass next tuesday, the 19th – in european style date format that is 19.3.2013

      another full circle

      Might i add that he is named after Francis of Assisi AND after Francis Xavier. Quite important …

      • p on March 14, 2013 at 5:28 am

        1+3=4 full circle? how? what circle? 4 is a circle?
        1+9=10 full circle? how? because it’s 10? why?

        what’s your point exactly?

        • JHM on March 14, 2013 at 8:46 am

          It was only an observation. And since yesterday the Vatican changed the date for the inaugurational mass to Wednesday, the 20th, which makes the end number for that day a 11. Funny, that.

          • JHM on March 15, 2013 at 7:59 am

            It seems the Vatican press office has a date problem. For a few hours there was the date of Wednesday the 20th announced for the inauguration mass instead of the originally declared 19th, now it is Tuesday the 19th again. No idea what is going on.

            I was watching the papal audience for the cardinals today. Pope Franciscus seems neither well nor healthy, he had problems speeking, got muddled very often, was breathing heavily (he has only one lung from early age on and seems to smoke still) and needed to make pauses quite often in his speech, which was, to put it mildly, neither intellectually elegant nor eloquent. He reminds me in many ways of a strange, even grotesque mixture of the appearance of Pope Ioannes XXIII. and the … err … total simplicity of Pope Ioannes Paulus I. – sorry, but i would not wonder if there would be another conclave this year. The man is a lacklustre bore in his appearance and talk, and when even a rather power-conscious, savvy and highly intelligent man like Benedictus XVI. could not clean up and control the snake pit which is the Roman Curia and gave up in the end, i wonder how this, forgive me, drab laughingstock on the throne of St. Peter will even be able to supervise his breakfast, let alone the roman church.

            Ok, i’ll give him the usual 100 days to see how things evolve. Maybe there is more behind the dull and sad look and feel of it all.

  9. marcos toledo on March 13, 2013 at 1:31 pm

    So St Malakey will wind up in the waste paper basket along with 2012.

  10. MizGreen on March 13, 2013 at 1:09 pm

    The previous pope from Nazi Germany, the new pope from post-war Argentina. As Arte Johnson would say, “vedy interestink.” 🙂

    • LSM on March 13, 2013 at 1:43 pm

      absolutely, MizGreen- was just announced on the news here in Germany that Francesco is the first Jesuit pope (am not sure if we should believe that or not) and if it’s true the Jesuits have the upper hand in the Vatican I think we could take it a bit farther: the Secretary General of the Jesuits is Adolpho Pochòn, a Spaniard- hence: Ratzinger (German), Francesco (Argentina) and the so-called “black pope” Pochòn (Spain)- even more of a post-war connection


      • MizGreen on March 13, 2013 at 2:29 pm

        Thanks for the extra info Larry.
        I’m not too well-versed on these things, but isn’t the leader of the Jesuit Order known as the ‘black pope’ because of his black clothing? And from what I’ve read, Jesuits are more loyal to their own Jesuit hierarchy than they are to the Vatican itself. So, perhaps Pope Francis’s loyalty could be mostly to that ‘black pope’ who might be running the RC show from the shadows now? Not sure if I’m on the right track here or not…..

        • LSM on March 13, 2013 at 3:54 pm

          Hi MizGreen- many thanks for your input-

          “isn’t the leader of the Jesuit Order known as the ‘black pope’ because of his black clothing?”- no (as far as I’ve understood it)- it’s because (IF!) the Jesuits really control the Vatican the Jesuit Secretary General works in the background and has the final say (hence “black pope”- a shadowy guy)-

          “Jesuits are more loyal to their own Jesuit hierarchy than they are to the Vatican itself”- exactly what I’ve read but don’t know if it’s true- but IF true it’s proof of at least they are a part of a breakaway society that controls the masses (as if the Vatican has no influence on the world)-

          “So, perhaps Pope Francis’s loyalty could be mostly to that ‘black pope’ who might be running the RC show from the shadows now?- I don’t think we should rule that out-

          “Not sure if I’m on the right track here or not…..”- you and me both, baby- am still trying myself to connect dots!-

          hope you are well- many regards-

          Larry in Germany

          • p on March 14, 2013 at 5:30 am

            “Jesuits are more loyal to their own Jesuit hierarchy than they are to the Vatican itself”- exactly what I’ve read but don’t know if it’s true- but IF true it’s proof of at least they are a part of a breakaway society that controls the masses (as if the Vatican has no influence on the world)-”

            If true, that by no means indicates they are part of a breakaway society, nor that it controls the masses. There is no proof of any of that. Not according to logic anyway.

          • paul de gagne on March 14, 2013 at 6:36 am

            “If True” —- The clue that after awhile sticks out at ya like a sore thumb is —the Vatican’s Status in the World. (Have you ever heard of a Religion being recognized as something like a unique Country in itself?)

            I really need to know more of what I am talking about and go back and finally read Yahweh: The Two Faced God to get a better idea or better aleign myself of where Farrell is going with all this?. I may be cross pollinating his idea and coming up with a hybrid idea that gets to complex for general analysis.

            I found in all my own searching in this Alternative Explanations Business the simpler one can say things is often the best way of approaching an Archetype or as one would say, “A meme?” . )

            The Vatican as a separate Entity is a good starting or jumping off point which of course includes the Vatican Bank’s money funnel but lets keep things simple or as elementary as possible and try and find out how this came about? ( going back a couple of thousand yrs or so minus a century or too, ha, ha!)

    • paul de gagne on March 13, 2013 at 2:28 pm


      What you posted was my first thoughts as well. Another devious mind in here!

      First there’s Nazi Ratzi, now this Argentina business. Makes one wonder what the dirt will be or what hidden connections if any with our International Friends discussed in here? (a little early but sometimes the real poop, ophs I mean scope, comes out accidently in the beginning before all the damage control teams arrive if all this wasn’t staged as poor theater in the first place. It’s hard to tell for certain?)

      Someone on the fixed-news-mainstream channel (aren’t they all?) said he was a Church (fat-cat) leader during Pinchot’s regime?

      He’s still alive so I guess he wasn’t too much of an outspoken advocate for the (get a load of this) the POOR of this dismal planet’s forgotten World! The pope with all his golden vestments! Nothing like do as I say rather than as I do?

      Also, He’s the first Church Papa to be named ‘Francis.” (maybe the brand name will be associated with something good but I doubt it?)

      Now that Cardinal in I think El Salvador who met his maker prematurely might have had some real concern with all that Liberation Theology/theories brewing back then during his reign but I don’t really know if that was the reason why his lights were put out by a very earthly bullet?

      All this Pope propaganda that is no doubt to be shilled out about concern for the down-trodden reminds me of our good old Hero John Lemon of the Sixties singing “All We Need is Love” and millions of kids like me believing it. ( and a BILLION smack-a-roos I think he died with certainly helps a little bit, ha, ha!)

      I wonder if he took it with him. (you know packed it in suitcases?)

      You laugh now but that may come true????? What with all this Trans-humanistic technological orgies of dreaming aren’t just grandiose Delusions of Immortality on the part of those rat observers in white coats!! (come to think of it isn’t Farrell a kind of a ‘rat’ observer only those kind of rats don’t wear white fur coats!

      • LSM on March 13, 2013 at 4:26 pm

        Hi paul,

        am not sure which posting of mine to which you’re referring- it’s unfortunately one of my draw-backs (and they are many) that I tend to verbalize my gut feelings (right brain side- the side of instinct and creativity) before my left brain side takes over-

        so now my left brain side (logic) is taking over as a response to your posting-

        babycakes, you’re leaving me completely in the dust with your response- can’t make heads or tails of it- so please do me (or other readers) a favor and break down your thoughts to a lowest common denominator (your last paragraph above all) or else some of us just might suspect you’re a shill (as if most of us couldn’t have already guessed)-

        if you continue to “traffic” on this website and others pay attention to you, fine- but stay out of my face

        • paul de gagne on March 13, 2013 at 4:52 pm

          Ok LSM – different strokes for different folks. I still will want to read your input as I do all the people in here.

          I inject a little bit of nonsense and satire when expounding on difficult and very dark subject matters for counter-balance. I ‘experience/feel’ what I write about rather than just dwell on an intellectual level (which is quite all right too)

          Aesthetics is still fine with me but in my eyes just aesthetics just doesn’t do it for me. You know, always talking “about’ things at a nice safe and cozy distance and not getting emotional or passionately involved with these linguistic fabrications.

          Taking it with you when you die as I mentioned is not a new Idea especially if one day in the scientific world our lifespans can be expanded by consciousness transfers from one earthly body to another..

          So in such a situation one can indeed take it with them!

          Besides, it’s not a very unique or new idea?

          Again, not to sound redundant

          “It seems to me quite a few Pharohs thought they could ‘take it with them.” (along with their unfortunate servant/slaves but then again some of those servants believed they could still follow him in the Netherworld like those cultists who committed mass suicide waiting for the flying saucer hiding on the other side of the moon to arrive down in California.)

          So you see LSM some mythological ideas are still sticking around, like it or not!

          LSM, forgive me if you couldn’t see the humour in what I wrote. Maybe I could better fine tune my own written skills but to tell you the truth LSM, I don’t think I was that too far out? You don’t like me, tough luck.

          If you don’t like what I write then just don’t read me. It’s just that simple!

          • LSM on March 18, 2013 at 5:27 am

            “LSM, forgive me if you couldn’t see the humour in what I wrote”-

            I appologize profusely-

            I guess I don’t find much humor in this subject so please forgive my ignorance/lack of insight into your humor- I’m not able to see behind everything (God only knows!)-

            this just goes to show us how sometimes an orthographic text can be mis-leading: one can’t hear an inflection/tone of voice behind it-

            actually I also find your postings interesting but I just become be-fuddled when someone writes cryptically (see above under concept “Im not able to see behind everything, etc.”-



          • paul de gagne on March 18, 2013 at 6:03 am

            ME NEITHER-

            I wish I could see behind everything but vison would probably kill me! (although it helps in our Culture of Suspicion.)

            Thank you very much LSM for your thoughtful consideration. People often accuse me of a lot of things (although their probably accurate) but one of them I am not is “lazy’ when it comes to ideas that motivate me I do my homework!

            So back to Quack-a-Pedia. I looked up that fancy word Orthography but liked the other heading “Orthographic Projection” better.

            Here goes:

            “Orthographic projection is a means of representing a three dimensional object in two dimensions. It is a form of parallel projection, where all the projection lines are orthogonal to the projection plane, resulting in affine transformation on the viewing scene.”

            LSM, If that is what you are saying about my writing then you have just made my day with such flattery, ha, ha! It almost puts me in with some of Farrrel’s dense writings. Which is a nice compliment?

            No, LSM, I am not that good enough for that but lets IMAGINE or create a simulation of how I sometimes write. Ever see Bruce Lee’s Movie – Enter the Dragon where while he was fighting the bad guy in the HALL OF MIRRORS? He heard a voice saying ‘see through the illusions and you will defeat…etc.”

            Well, he was tip-towing, going very slow. Now I am not no flying eagle like some of you in here (just a wanna-be) I have to write real slow and I find much of the purely abstract writing of Science CONFOUNDING! (so how do I understand all of that and some of Farrell’s idea — I tip-toe around, ha, ha!)

            I better stop posting this much on this site or somebody will think I am upstaging someone. I am not. I am just ENJOYING” the dialogue.

            And by the way, can anyone tell me what “affine transformation” means not in scientific language but in PLANE ENGLISH! HA, HA!

            Again, thanks, LSM for showing me you too can see through walls – speaking figure-wise that is?

  11. LSM on March 13, 2013 at 1:09 pm

    and so much for Leo Zagami’s prediction in his 2008 interview with Cassidy/Ryan that the new pope will be Nigerian (or did he confuse ‘Nigerian’ with ‘Argentinian’? 🙂 )

    • dimitris on March 13, 2013 at 2:03 pm

      is not the head of the jesuits called the “black pope”?

      • Elm on March 15, 2013 at 5:14 pm

        Yes. The Jesuits were founded to destroy the protestant reformation & enlightenment, of which the constitutional republic of the several states is an expression. That Rome has now selected a Jesuit for Pope is an indication the Jesuits have taken control of the Vatican.

        As the Jesuit discipline suggests, black is white & white is black, meaning truth is falsehood — light is darkness & darkness is light. Even evil & falsehood seek to present themselves as truth, so as to seduce a people into an embrace of their own destroyer.

        Rome is Luciferic/Illuminati & the eclesiastical center of the Globalist Old World Venetian & Babylonian Order. London is currently finance, & DC the military point of the triangle.

        Essential is this… An apparent humility is often not commensurate with an internal humility, but rather exploited for appearances’ sake only, so as to deceive the people — i.e., into an acceptance & embrace of that thing which appears to be, but is not.

        The Illuminati exploit & weaponize such things as sexuality as an occultic weapon of “illumination,” disassembly & political control. In this, Alfred Kinsey’s scientific pretext has served admirably to dislodge the American constitutional republic from her moral foundation.

        Truth is bound up with light, vision & enlightenment. When truth is suppressed & obfuscated, higher vision is destroyed & freedom flies out the window. No optomatrist is able to offer correction for a loss of vision. The people perish from a loss of “vision,” not sight. Illumination destroys both truth & vision, thus the Illuminati conspire to destroy both vision & freedom in a presentment of those things which appear to be but are not. Whereas to be en-light-ened means to be filled with light, to become “illuminated” means to be filled with & consumed by darkness.

        An “illumination” of a people is their desent into darkness. This is the Luciferic Principle — the art, or craft, of concealing darkness & death in light, i.e., “illumination.” Once again, Illumination is an occultic mechanism of deception & obfuscation so as to facilitate more powerful top down forms of social & political control. Never confuse “illumination” with en-light-enment. This misperception & fundamental contradiction between substance & form & its manipulation, is precisely what causes a people to fall into the embrace of their own destroyer. The lesson from a Biblical perspective, is found in a seduction of Samson by Delilah, that in a loss of sight Samson regains his vision.

  12. DownunderET on March 13, 2013 at 12:43 pm

    Jeezzz that was quick, I expected it to go longer because of the “factions” spin the MSM put on it.

    So, no Peter the Roman, what a disapointment.

    Ok, now for the spin, and the reasons he was chosen, anybody here want to take a shot at it.

    No matter which way one slices it, it will be a Pope who will…..
    1) Take the church in a new direction


    2) Clean up the image of the church

    Well I ain’t buy’n any of it.

    • MQ on March 13, 2013 at 9:20 pm

      Since this new pope is not significantly younger than the last one, this seems like another stop gap solution. Maybe choosing a jesuit satisfies some other political considerations. I mean, the guys only got 1 lung and is 76. That doesn’t tell me “stability for the next 10-15 years”.

  13. Paden on March 13, 2013 at 12:39 pm

    I’ve heard preemptive spin insofar as, technically speaking, all the popes sit on the Throne of Peter.

    • paul de gagne on March 13, 2013 at 10:05 pm

      Didn’t Saint Peter get martyred or crucified upside down on a cross? Or was it Saint Stephen who died that way? I forget most of my early catholic history training.

      As Mel Brook is famous for saying — “It’s good to be King.” (ya know sit on a throne) but not when one has to pay for it with their life! No, that kind of ambition not for me. Certainly not one to EMULATE like thousands do!

      Did you see that mob standing out in front when the Pope addressed this audience. I was looking for some masonic hand-sign or at least an arm salute but got disappointed. So I know he’s 77 but does he really have only one lung left? Maybe that’s a blessing having to breathe in such toxic or rarified air that I imagine is hidden behind such secretive doors?

      Anyone who can turn the word Infallible into INFATIBLE like downunder has, HAS got my attention, ha, ha — that’s the kind of Wit or deliberate mis-statement needed around here for I believe it’sindicative of the kind of perception management that can outdo/undo all this propaganda thrown at us day in and day out! You know the kind able to ‘dispel the spells’ that all this bullsh$t cast at us day in and day out in this petty pace…etc?

      • Don B on March 14, 2013 at 4:18 pm

        Paul, I think tradition has it that Peter was crucified upside down and Stephen was stoned. Dr. Farrell could clarify that. Its been many years since my Biblical studies.


Help the Community Grow

Please understand a donation is a gift and does not confer membership or license to audiobooks. To become a paid member, visit member registration.

Upcoming Events