Other
See other Other Articles
Title: Who gives shit if Godwinson post here again?
Source:
[None]
URL Source: [None]
Published: Oct 26, 2011
Author: A K A Stone
Post Date: 2011-10-26 11:24:19 by A K A Stone
Keywords: None
Views: 470444
Comments: 595
Who would like to see him post here again?
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 397.
#46. To: A K A Stone (#0)
(Edited)
Stone, You are the only forum owner I'm aware of that tolerates being told to 'fuck off' 'suck my dick' 'you are an asshole' 'the site runs better when you aren't here' etc etc etc. Every thread here degenerates to that eventually, at least the ones you happen to post on. As such, yep, the site is sliding downhill faster with each passing week. Combined with your allowing some to use it for personal attack threads, or racial bullshit...it comes down to a simple question: Why bother with LF? You don't give a shit how it looks. You don't give a shit how these kooks talk trash to YOU for God's sake. Which is why even that idiot Goldi gets more respect than you do in her kooky forum. Or JR at Free Republic, or mystery over at GBR. You aren't promoting 'freedom of speech' by allowing this crap, Stone. You simply promote your site isn't to be taken seriously, because nobody here takes YOU seriously. I drop by every day, but honestly, there hasn't been anything here worth commenting on for the past couple of weeks. Its your site, Stone. but the reason it hasn't grown is because you haven't 'grown' as a site owner/operator. This isn't about politics, or anything else, as much as it is kooks talking shit behind absurd screen names in ways they'd NEVER do in the real world. Basically, its a fantasyland for losers that have been banned from legitimate sites for the obvious reasons. As for 'godwincing' posters come, posters go. The rep of the site is what you should be worrying about. Thats the only 'constant' you have any influence over. So far, this site is just as amaturishly run as it was when I signed up. And thats the problem...unless you enjoy being humiliated, taunted, and insulted by people on the internet. Maybe you do. I honestly don't get it, but its your site. Like the song says, you can't always have what you want, but you get what you need, eh? Seeya round.
Thanks for reminding me what a fucking hypocrite you are.
He criticized Neil to no end and even lied to him on elPee - about those two monikers - almost sounds like Monocle.
Bullshit Freddie. Neil was a self appointed 'site manager' who was upset I didn't 1) Agree with him on the election...2) Didn't kiss his ass because I knew he was a flat out fraud. Much later, when he laid down and whimpered in court after all his bravado on the internet, he confirmed my view of him. Which is why he's still my personal internet bitch to this very day (laughing). I never lied to him, like you, he wasn't worth a lie. Nice spin though. Now, why are YOU here, hypocritical freddie?
Good question. The same question could be asked of the other House Commies, but I think we know the answer to that query: To agitate, spam, shill, and otherwise promote Commie propaganda. To their (dis)credit, it's the same reasons Police-Statist fascists frequent and infect conservative forums - to promote their brand of Big Goob control.
I do believe the speakers on your STEREOtype are out of whack, lippie.
I do believe the speakers on your STEREOtype are out of whack, lippie. Go ahead, Mike. re-calibrate MY characterization of your ilk through YOUR eyes....er through my speakers. Btw, I find my new pet name clever. I'll have to reciprocate the favor.
And you will have to forgive me, but as someone who's name can be written as M. Joseph McCarthy, it is terribly comical for me to hear you talking like you are aspiring to become the chairman of a new Senate Un-American Activities committee. ;-D
You DO know that McCarthy was right about every single communist agent he named,right?
Yes he was.
Yes he was. Oh Bullshit...he accused the Secretary of the Army, Robert Stevens, of being a Communist which is how McCarthy lost Eisenhower. That said, McCarthy actually "named" very few people and those he did name were a) from a list that had been compiled by HUAC in 1946/47 and b) were people who were mostly exonerated and remain so to this day. McCarthy focused mainly not on people but on the activities of groups and articles in publications. You've said this before, sneak, and have gotten the smack down.
Maybe he was? Or maybe,McCarthy never made the charge that he was a communist,and this is a lie the media spread to help defame McCarthy? Maybe what McCarthy claimed is that Stephens associated with or was friends with people who were security risks because of their communist connections or leanings,and this became "Joe called him a communist!" which is how McCarthy lost Eisenhower. Eisenhower was nothing more than a overpaid clerk. As far as I know the only really good thing he did personally his whole life was remind everybody to "beware of the military-industrial complex" on his way out the WH door. That doesn't make up for him leading the raid on the Bonus Marchers,though. Which is the closest this General ever got to combat. That said, McCarthy actually "named" very few people Because the list was Top Secret and he couldn't name them without exposing intelligence gathering procedures and spoiling surveillance operations. ...those he did name were a) from a list that had been compiled by HUAC in 1946/47 They may have been on that list,but that wasn't the only list they were on. ..and b) were people who were mostly exonerated and remain so to this day. "Mosty exonerated"? Were some of them a little bit pregnant? What you are trying to say without saying it is that they were never put on trial for their treasonous acts and the left continued to bray about them being innocent. You've said this before, sneak, and have gotten the smack down. Don't confuse your delusions with reality.
Background: However, there can be no doubt about the direct orders of Eisenhower in Operation Keelhaul- the repatriation of over two million former Russian prisoners of war to Joseph Stalin. While the actions of Eisenhower have always been maintained as a fact of life following the Yalta Agreement between Churchill, Stalin and Roosevelt, the manner and clear fate of these poor souls was nothing short of Genocide on the same level as Adolf Hitler and the SS. [Article excerpt end] Parrot: The above article is from a website which peels the layers on leaders who have been prominent figures in Globalism from WW-1 onwards.
Whether true or false, there is no question that Eisenhower quickly shelved the Churchill plan of a 1943 invasion while the Nazi forces were in a state of disarray and allowed the Germans a full six months to re-arm and re- equip their French forces ahead of any invasion. In 1944, Eisenhower was confirmed as a Five Star General and Chief of the Army. In spite of the massive logistical superiority of the Allied forces, the Eisenhower D-Day plan very nearly failed. Again, during the Battle of the Bulge Eisenhower inexplicably ordered the halt of the encirclement of German forces enabling up to 150,000 to escape and prolonging the war a further twelve months. No rational, military or political explanation for this order has ever been given. The effect of Eisenhower's deliberate decisions to prolong the war cost an additional 100,000 allied personnel and effectively handed Eastern Europe to the Soviet Union. One man that did know the truth was Gen. George Smith Patton. On December 9th 1945, the day before he was due to fly back to Washington to meet with President Truman with proof that Eisenhower was a traitor who had costs the lives of thousands of American soldiers and millions of civilians, he was seriously injured in a “road accident” near Mannheim, Germany on 9 Dec 1945 (dying in hospital 21 December 1945). Fascinating stuff. Were there any witnesses or any documentation of the supposed German surrender terms from 1943? There's no question that Ike, FDR, his Commie overlords or whomever sandbagged the advance of the US military and sabotaged our own efforts by the end of WWII. Cutting a deal with Stalin and the American Commies did NOT work out well; It should have been ridiculed by everyone at the time. So for all Patton's mouthy warnings and loathing of the Soviets, HE was right, and FDR was wrong. He smelled the stench of rot from DC and had had it. Some things never change... Btw, a program has been running on the History Channel (I believe) where three historical researchers explore the mystery of Patton's odd death in depth, speaking to those who'd known Patton - as well as his grand-daughter. They even traveled to the US Army Medical Hospital in Heidelberg, Germany. Of course after speaking to Army personnel, they conclude it to be purely "accidental," just like the "official" report. I was shocked. /s
There were several attempts by the German High Command to make a separate peace with the west,and they were all turned down. The most common reason/explanation given is that the Germans wanted a negotiated surrender leaving the Germans in charge of Germany,and the Allies wanted a unconditional surrender. Mostly the Brits and the Soviets. AFAIK there is zero controversy over this. It is a established historical fact that the German Military kept trying to surrender,and kept getting ignored. Even Rommel was a part of the conspiracy. He managed to avoid being hanged on a meat hook,but a lot of the other senior officers weren't so lucky. The one German Waffen war hero (Stauffenberg) that tried to blow up Hitler's bunker and kill Hitler. Tom Cruise recently starred in a movie about this and played the role of Stauffenberg. Even though the Allies refused to accept their surrender terms,the senior officers thought killing Hitler would be a good move that might cause public opinion to demand the Allies negotiate a surrender if Hitler were killed. Here is a interesting link with attempts to kill Hitler listed. This is the first time I ever heard that Ike was the one that made the decision to do this,though. Probably because the mere suggestion that a theater General or anybody else in the military had the authority to turn down a surrender during a war would result in howls of laughter. That type of thing is a political decision,not a military one. Soldiers,sailors,and Marines may accept the surrender of enemy soldiers,but it takes a nation to accept the surrender of a nation. So for all Patton's mouthy warnings and loathing of the Soviets, HE was right, and FDR was wrong. He smelled the stench of rot from DC and had had it. Yup. Not much doubt about that. Nor is there much doubt that Patton would have beaten Truman like a rented mule if he had came back to the US,put in his retirement papers,and announced he was running for President as a Republican. Patton was the Rock Star General of WW-2. "The American Rommel". He was wildly popular with the citizens for all his victories during the war.
A nice try, but... It is a established historical fact that the German Military kept trying to surrender,and kept getting ignored. Even Rommel was a part of the conspiracy...Tom Cruise recently starred in a movie about [the conspiracy to kill Hitler] and played the role of Stauffenberg. Cruise 's casting as von Stauffenberg prevented me from watching what would have been a very interesting movie for me. Hess's solo flight to Ireland was the first indication that some Germans had second thoughts about the "Today Germany, Tomorrow ze Vorld" thingy. After watching in horror as Hitler sacrificed the German Army outside Stalingrad had to clinch this notion for a number of military high command. That type of thing is a political decision,not a military one. Soldiers,sailors,and Marines may accept the surrender of enemy soldiers,but it takes a nation to accept the surrender of a nation. Hear ya. Of the German offer to surrender was the question of authority as was the acceptance of such surrender to finalize the terms. Nor is there much doubt that Patton would have beaten Truman like a rented mule if he had came back to the US,put in his retirement papers,and announced he was running for President as a Republican. Patton was the Rock Star General of WW-2. "The American Rommel". He was wildly popular with the citizens for all his victories during the war. Fascinating to think about were Patton to have spilled all the beans AND ran for office. Make a good movie, don't you think? Like JFK, there were any number of people who had reason to have Patton silenced - including Ike, the State Dept, the Ruskies, the Dems, the *American* Commies, and of course the globalist-elites who called all the shots.
A nice try, but... But what? Spit it out. Cruise 's casting as von Stauffenberg prevented me from watching what would have been a very interesting movie for me. Me,too. Von Stauffenberg was a serious man and a serious soldier that was prepared to give up his own life and bring harm to his family in order to save his country,not a pretty boy. Hess's solo flight to Ireland was the first indication that some Germans had second thoughts about the "Today Germany, Tomorrow ze Vorld" thingy. Yeah,and we all saw what THAT got him,prison for his entire life,despite him being the one Nazi completely innocent of war crimes. Fascinating to think about were Patton to have spilled all the beans AND ran for office. Make a good movie, don't you think? LOL!Nobody ever called Patton a shrinking violet,so there can be no doubt that he would have made everything he knew about war mismanagement and official corruption public and even gone so far as to name names. The biggest problem with a movie about him would be nobody that grew up today would believe it was anything but fiction. IMHO,this is as responsible for the murder conspiracies as anything else. NOBODY was under the illusion that Patton could really be controlled.
Nice (but failed) try by the German generals to convince the allies that a conditional surrender was palatable. My bad at explaining my thought. Von Stauffenberg was a serious man and a serious soldier that was prepared to give up his own life and bring harm to his family in order to save his country,not a pretty boy. I'd read that von Staffenberg was a serious military man of great integrity, respected by many; he was badly injured in as well in action. To see Tom Cruise trying to pull that personality and look off (including eye-patch) seemed almost comical to me. Although the word was that von Staffenberg was a handsome man, he wasn't a pretty-boy. Cruise brought to much cutsy/pretty-boy baggage with him from his movies. Too bad for us - it should have been a good movie. Yeah,and we all saw what THAT got him [Hess], prison for his entire life,despite him being the one Nazi completely innocent of war crimes. Hadn't thought about that perspective. But even Speer served 20 years for being a Nazi architect. Maybe it was assumed Hitler's inner-circle of Nazi pals weren't as innocent as claimed. LOL!Nobody ever called Patton a shrinking violet,so there can be no doubt that he would have made everything he knew about war mismanagement and official corruption public and even gone so far as to name names. The biggest problem with a movie about him would be nobody that grew up today would believe it was anything but fiction. The chaos he would have created by simply stating the truth would have been really hard to believe. Problem for Ike and the elites was Patton was believed AND believable - despite his rep as a little nuts. Heck, it's scarcely believed today that 0bama is gay, a Marxist, a Muslim, and attended a "Hate-Whitey!" church for 20 years, and it's been proven. IMHO,this is as responsible for the murder conspiracies as anything else. NOBODY was under the illusion that Patton could really be controlled. Yep. Almost anyone could have had a motive to off Patton.
No problemo : ).....look where our conversation went ,...and how it was enlarged sneakypete noted correctly in the article I posted that Ike did not make the calls which historians claim created an extended war and loss of American lives. .... ... So who was this character represented by the original “Don Quixote” of whom Cervantes wrote so affectionately? “It was Ignatius Loyola” [13].... .... Catholic professor Miguel de Unamuno in his book [16] draws parallels between Don Quixote and the life of the founder of the Jesuit Order, Ignatius of Loyola, their “Lord”. And the Jesuit-trained Voltaire wrote, the only difference between Loyola and the Quixote, is that “Don Quixote had a horse and an esquire, but Ignatius was not provided with either.”[17][end] Parrot....so ya....These symbols at the end of the Movie Patton indicate to me that the Jesuits had Patton ended.
I agree. These groups are nothing more than handy tools. and yet...The Pope..just recently stated that the World needs a global banking system. That is one of the oldest organized crime organizations in the world. Why would anybody expect them to give up so easily after so many years in the game? They lust after a return to the lost power and wealth they once had. Don't make the mistake of thinking the Catholics are the only players in this game,though. The Hebrews and the Muslims are also players. This competition for control is what has driven the wars of the last couple of centuries.
#413. To: sneakypete, Parrot with speed dial (#397)
(Edited)
That is one of the oldest organized crime organizations in the world. Why would anybody expect them to give up so easily after so many years in the game? They lust after a return to the lost power and wealth they once had. Don't make the mistake of thinking the Catholics are the only players in this game,though. The Hebrews and the Muslims are also players. This competition for control is what has driven the wars of the last couple of centuries. The globalists now have a green light to do whatever they want. They own DC. The own the media. They own the bank. It appears the usual and traditional cast of world power elites are going for the throat, colluding to completely stomp out any rogue elements of pro-sovereignty players and nations. Iraq, Libya and Egypt are now under control despite the illusion of the so-called "Arab Spring." Once the Unholy Alliance sorts put that pesky sovereignty problem they've had with a stubborn US, all that's left is for the One World Governance is to divvy up the middle class's loot and land and serfs. Ye olde Vatican Empire, British Empire, Bluebloods, Rothchild Banksters, and Secular Hebrews will all again be Kings of this World. China appears to be unwilling participants of the Western Globalists chess game. For now. I don't think the Muslims have any place reserved at the globalists' table - it appears they are mere bogeymen and tools-by-design. They appear well-suited to the role (as are the illegal Mexicans) of disrupting Western cultures and economies, challenging host sovereignties, and keeping us in a perpetual state of "crisis." On behalf of the global elites of course. Expect ever more intrusive draconian security measures in order to "keep us safe."
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#70. To: Badeye (#46)
#73. To: war (#70)
#81. To: Fred Mertz (#73)
#92. To: Badeye (#81)
Now, why are YOU here, hypocritical freddie?
#130. To: Liberator (#92)
"To agitate, spam, shill, and otherwise promote Commie propaganda. To their (dis)credit, it's the same reasons Police-Statist fascists frequent and infect conservative forums - to promote their brand of Big Goob control."
#132. To: Ferret Mike (#130)
("To agitate, spam, shill, and otherwise promote Commie propaganda. To their (dis)credit, it's the same reasons Police-Statist fascists frequent and infect conservative forums - to promote their brand of Big Goob control.")
#139. To: Liberator (#132)
"Go ahead, Mike. re-calibrate MY characterization of your ilk through YOUR eyes....er through my speakers."
#162. To: Ferret Mike (#139)
And you will have to forgive me, but as someone who's name can be written as M. Joseph McCarthy, it is terribly comical for me to hear you talking like you are aspiring to become the chairman of a new Senate Un-American Activities committee. ;-D
#174. To: sneakypete (#162)
You DO know that McCarthy was right about every single communist agent he named,right?
#175. To: Badeye, sneakypete (#174)
(Edited)
You DO know that McCarthy was right about every single communist agent he named,right?
#197. To: war (#175)
Oh Bullshit...he accused the Secretary of the Army, Robert Stevens, of being a Communist...
#292. To: sneakypete (#197)
Eisenhower was nothing more than a overpaid clerk. As far as I know the only really good thing he did personally his whole life was remind everybody to "beware of the military-industrial complex" on his way out the WH door. That doesn't make up for him leading the raid on the Bonus Marchers,though. Which is the closest this General ever got to combat.
Born the third of seven sons in Denison, Texas to David Jacob Eisenhower and Ida Elizabeth Stover. His father was an Engineer while his mother was a devoted follower and supporter of the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society (Jehovah's Witnesses). The family home served as the local meeting hall for the group from 1896 to 1915.
The constant and regular exposure of Eisenhower to End of the World imagery mixed with Bible prophecy by the Jehovah's Witnesses had a profound impact on him throughout his life. While he was never a gifted student, nor known for his intellect, his fascination in occult and religious power placed him more than once midst powerful men, who assisted his career.
Dwight graduated from High School around 1909 at the age of 19. He then took a night shift labouring job at the Belle Springs Creamery. In 1911, Eisenhower attempted to apply for the Naval Academy but failed the basic entrance exam. In later years, his record was changed to claim he passed, but was somehow ineligible on account of his age, even though he qualified under the age limit at the time.
Later that year (1911), powerful US Senator for Kansas Joseph L. Bristow used his influence to get Eisenhower into West Point Military Academy. The motivation for this act and how he came to know Eisenhower has never been properly explained. At Westpoint Eisenhower again he showed mediocre academic skills, but managed to scrape through and graduate.
Unlike most of his fellow graduates, Eisenhower never saw action in World War I. Instead, he spent the first few years with the National Guard and then assigned to various new tank corps where he met General Fox Conner. He had the dubious honor of having his temporary rank of Major being revoked and being demoted back to Captain by 1922.
When General Conner was appointed Camp Gaillard, Panama and the Panama Canal Zone, he made Eisenhower his executive officer - a role he held from 1922 until 1924. It was under the guidance of General Conner that Eisenhower found a grounding in essential military strategy and politics. After finishing his term with Conner, Eisenhower was promoted again to Major and attended the Command and General Staff College at Fort Leavenworth.
His career then stagnated for five years until in 1929 he was appointed Executive Assistant to General George Moseley, then Secretary of War. In 1933, he was then appointed chief military aide to General Douglas MacArthur and accompanied him to the Philippines. It was through MacArthur that Eisenhower first came to the attention of the all-powerful American Jesuit Fr. Edmund A. Walsh. MacArthur was educated by the Jesuits and Walsh was his influential patron.
Eisenhower quickly became an even more deeply devoted fan of Fr. Walsh and his geopolitical mind than his superior General MacArthur.
At the outbreak of World War II in 1939, Eisenhower returned from the Philippines at 49 but a Lt. Colonel. By June 1941, six months before the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor, Col. Eisenhower was appointed to the War Department General Staff in Washington D.C. and to a role holding the temporary rank of Brigadier General.
Whatever his role in the events leading up to Pearl Harbor, he soon held favor with President Franklin D. Roosevelt, another staunch supporter of Fr. Edmund A. Walsh S.J.
In December 1943, President Roosevelt announced Eisenhower, still then only officially holding the rank of Colonel would be the Supreme Allied Commander in Europe, being promoted immediately to being a four star Major General - one of the most dramatic rise in promotions in American history.
The announcement sent shockwaves through the US and even the Allied forces as Eisenhower was promoted over the heads of over fifty seasoned military leaders, including his former friend and mentor Douglas MacArthur - all of whom had far greater skill and merit.
Upon his arrival in England in 1943, a controversial claim has been made that Eisenhower received a communique from senior members of the SS offering clear and specific terms of unconditional surrender of all German forces, including the assassination of Hitler, if the Americans would help halt the Soviet advance into Central Europe.
Whether true or false, there is no question that Eisenhower quickly shelved the Churchill plan of a 1943 invasion while the Nazi forces were in a state of disarray and allowed the Germans a full six months to re-arm and re- equip their French forces ahead of any invasion.
In 1944, Eisenhower was confirmed as a Five Star General and Chief of the Army. In spite of the massive logistical superiority of the Allied forces, the Eisenhower D-Day plan very nearly failed. Again, during the Battle of the Bulge Eisenhower inexplicably ordered the halt of the encirclement of German forces enabling up to 150,000 to escape and prolonging the war a further twelve months.
No rational, military or political explanation for this order has ever been given. The effect of Eisenhower's deliberate decisions to prolong the war cost an additional 100,000 allied personnel and effectively handed Eastern Europe to the Soviet Union.
One man that did know the truth was Gen. George Smith Patton. On December 9th 1945, the day before he was due to fly back to Washington to meet with President Truman with proof that Eisenhower was a traitor who had costs the lives of thousands of American soldiers and millions of civilians, he was seriously injured in a “road accident” near Mannheim, Germany on 9 Dec 1945 (dying in hospital 21 December 1945). Miraculously the other occupants of the car in which Patton was critically injured escaped unharmed.
To counter the claims and rumour mills, Eisenhower authorised the leak of stories to damage the character of Patton including blaming Patton for the escape of the 150,000 soldiers of the German army and that Patton was mentally unstable. These false rumours still persist today.
While the Vatican/Jesuits do not Run the NWO,...they are...and certain Jesuits like Edmund Walsh,...have been guides..steering from behind the curtain.
Father Walsh with General Douglas MacArthur in Tokyo, 1948
Since WW-2 and the emergence of the IMF/World Bank,and the various thinktank groups/councils...like the CFR,The 300 Committee,Bilderbergs,
Vatican/Jesuit influence has been passed off to these.
#310. To: Parrot with speed dial, sneakypete (#292)
Upon his arrival in England in 1943, a controversial claim has been made that Eisenhower received a communique from senior members of the SS offering clear and specific terms of unconditional surrender of all German forces, including the assassination of Hitler, if the Americans would help halt the Soviet advance into Central Europe.
#331. To: Liberator (#310)
Were there any witnesses or any documentation of the supposed German surrender terms from 1943?
#339. To: sneakypete, Parrot with speed dial (#331)
There were several attempts by the German High Command to make a separate peace with the west,and they were all turned down. The most common reason/explanation given is that the Germans wanted a negotiated surrender leaving the Germans in charge of Germany,and the Allies wanted a unconditional surrender. Mostly the Brits and the Soviets....
#350. To: Liberator (#339)
#352. To: sneakypete (#350)
But what? Spit it out.
#357. To: Liberator, sneakypete (#352)
Nice (but failed) try by the German generals to convince the allies that a conditional surrender was palatable. My bad at explaining my thought.
I got to thinking about WW-2 and the Globalist agenda of that time,
question....Who would have an intelligence service which was extant to Russia,Europe,and America....capable of soft influence and critical intervention to change the outcome of events?
The many resources on the net[Historical works/evidences]... which place the Jesuits and Vatican in this slot sits well with me.
I think the Globalists use* whichever medium/mediums can best effect their plans.
Since the creation of the IMF/World Bank,...the 300 Group,CFR,Bilderbergs etc,....the torch appears to have been passed off to these worker houses.
and yet...The Pope..just recently stated that the World needs a global banking system
In the movie Patton,..at the end,...he walks down a hall to be dismissed,..on his way down the hall....you see the Bust of a Caesar.
next..he is walking in an open field by a windmill.
Don Quixote.....tilting at Windmills,...a Jesuit symbol
excerpt:
But who is this character Don Quixote? The Jesuit Carroll Quigley once said, “Look at the real situations which lie beneath the conceptual and verbal symbols.” So let’s take his advice. Quixote was satirically characterized as the epically famous “madman” of Azpeitia. If we start with Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, the author of Don Quixote, we discover that not only was he a “strict Roman Catholic” it is believed that he also attended a Jesuit school in 1566: “Cervantes is likely [to have] enrolled in a Jesuit high school (colegio).”[12] Next we find that Cervantes’ book Don Quixote expressly refers to the pope as “His Holiness the Pope…” and “his holiness Pope Pius V of happy memory.” (pp. 138, 331).
#397. To: Parrot with speed dial (#357)
I think the Globalists use* whichever medium/mediums can best effect their plans.
Replies to Comment # 397. I think the Globalists use* whichever medium/mediums can best effect their plans.
End Trace Mode for Comment # 397.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]