Greenberg’s main lifework was his long tenure (1968-2005) as the CEO of AIG, the world’s largest insurance company, founded by Cornelius V. Starr as American Asiatic Underwriters in 1919. Starr was a high level operative in the intelligence agency OSS, the predecessor of the CIA, which was founded by devout Roman Catholic William J. Donovan, who was awarded the highest possible honor by the Pope (Knight Grand Cross of the Order of St. Sylvester). Starr hired Greenberg in 1960 and named him his successor as the head of the company in 1968.
In 1973, Greenberg hired Brian Duperreault, who’s a devout Roman Catholic and was Jesuit trained at Saint Joseph’s University. Duperreault became Greenberg’s acolyte and was long considered as his successor at AIG.
Mr. Duperreault’s first assignment was to create divorce insurance that would guarantee income should a marriage fail. While that product wasn’t launched, he eventually became a key lieutenant of the legendarily hard-charging Mr. Greenberg.
Mr. Duperreault said he left AIG in 1994 to determine if he had “the wherewithal to stand alone and succeed” without Mr. Greenberg.
In an interview, Mr. Greenberg said he is pleased to see Mr. Duperreault back at AIG, calling him “a good choice.” Mr. Greenberg left AIG in 2005 and now runs insurance and investment firm Starr Cos.
So, Duperreault did eventually indeed become the CEO of AIG in 2017, Greenberg having been ousted amid an accounting scandal in 2005. Duperreault has been an associate of the Greenberg family outside AIG as well:
His career path has intersected with members of the Greenberg family multiple times. At ACE he was eventually succeeded as CEO by Evan Greenberg, the son of the former AIG chief executive. Mr. Duperreault had been a mentor to the younger Evan Greenberg at AIG and hired him for a senior job at ACE.
At Marsh Mr. Duperreault took over a post held at one time by Evan Greenberg’s brother, Jeffrey.
Jeffrey Greenberg is Jesuit trained, like Duperreault, with a JD from Georgetown University, the Jesuit power base in Washington, D.C., and a CFR member.
Because prominent Jewish figures often have ties to the Vatican and Jesuits, I decided to look into Hank Greenberg’s possible Jesuit connections, and I was surprised by how easily I found them. Greenberg is now the chairman of the Starr Foundation, which was founded by C.V. Starr in 1955. With Starr having been a high level OSS operative, it’s perhaps not far-fetched to assume that the Starr Foundation could be a CIA front.
The Jesuit Bank of America
As to AIG, not only is its current CEO Jesuit trained, but so is its COO Peter Zaffino, who has a BA from Jesuit Boston College. So the Jesuits probably have a significant stake in AIG, like they’ve had in Bank of America, the second largest banking institution in the USA;
The influence of the Society of Jesus in the American financial world first became apparent about fifty years ago when the Italian financier A. P. Giannini founded the Bank of California, which is now one of the largest banks in the world under the changed name “Bank of America”. Giannini was an extremely skilled financier, who owed his start-up capital to the Jesuits and acted as their trusted or straw man. Today, Bank of America is 51 percent owned by the Order.
Many might think that was a slip or mistake, but I don’t think so. I believe he meant what he said, and that he had most likely been told by his Catholic advisors to use that word.
George W. Bush the “nation’s first Catholic president”
In 2008, during George W. Bush’s presidency, The Washington Post published the op-ed “A Catholic Wind in the White House”, where he was referred to as the “nation’s first Catholic president”;
Shortly after Pope Benedict XVI’s election in 2005, President Bush met with a small circle of advisers in the Oval Office. As some mentioned their own religious backgrounds, the president remarked that he had read one of the new pontiff’s books about faith and culture in Western Europe.
Save for one other soul, Bush was the only non-Catholic in the room. But his interest in the pope’s writings was no surprise to those around him. As the White House prepares to welcome Benedict on Tuesday, many in Bush’s inner circle expect the pontiff to find a kindred spirit in the president. Because if Bill Clinton can be called America’s first black president, some say, then George W. Bush could well be the nation’s first Catholic president.
This isn’t as strange a notion as it sounds. Yes, there was John F. Kennedy. But where Kennedy sought to divorce his religion from his office, Bush has welcomed Roman Catholic doctrine and teachings into the White House and based many important domestic policy decisions on them.
“I don’t think there’s any question about it,” says Rick Santorum, former U.S. senator from Pennsylvania and a devout Catholic, who was the first to give Bush the “Catholic president” label. “He’s certainly much more Catholic than Kennedy.”
Bush attends an Episcopal church in Washington and belongs to a Methodist church in Texas, and his political base is solidly evangelical. Yet this Protestant president has surrounded himself with Roman Catholic intellectuals, speechwriters, professors, priests, bishops and politicians. These Catholics — and thus Catholic social teaching — have for the past eight years been shaping Bush’s speeches, policies and legacy to a degree perhaps unprecedented in U.S. history.
“I used to say that there are more Catholics on President Bush’s speechwriting team than on any Notre Dame starting lineup in the past half-century,” said former Bush scribe — and Catholic — William McGurn.
In April 2008, Bush said he sees God in Pope Benedict‘s eyes:
Finally, Arroyo asked him, “You said, famously, when you looked into Vladimir Putin’s eyes you saw his soul. […] When you look into Benedict XVI’s eyes what do you see?”
Now the crusade reference is starting to make more sense, isn’t it?
In 2004 Bush spoke at the Knights of Columbus (K of C ) convention. The Knights of Columbus is a Catholic fraternal order, founded by Michael J. McGivney, a Catholic priest, who had originally wanted to become a Jesuit. Today the order has almost 2 million members around the world. Bush’s brother Jeb, a devout Roman Catholic, is a 4th degree Knight of Columbus.
George W. Bush at the K of C convention
Notice the Roman fasces in the K of C logo. There’s a fasces also on both sides behind the Speaker’s podium in the United States House of Representatives, which is inside the United States Capitol.
(On the outside, the United States Capitol looks a lot like the St. Peter’s Basilica, is located on Capitol Hill, as in the Capitoline Hill in Rome, and what’s more, both these buildings face an obelisk. Do you think they might be trying to tell us something…)
Andrew Bertie and George Bush at the White House, 1991
George W. Bush has also spoken many times at the Legatus summit. Legatus is a global network of Catholic business leaders, founded by Tom Monaghan, the founder of Domino’s Pizza. Monaghan is a Knight of Malta.
But weren’t the “Jewish” Neocons behind the Iraq War?
It’s true that leading neoconservatives played a major part in the buildup to the Iraq War, and that many of them were Jewish, such as these men who served in key positions in the Bush administration: Paul Wolfowitz, Deputy Secretary of Defense (2001-2005); Douglas J. Feith, Under Secretary of Defense for Policy (2001-2005), Elliot Abrams; Richard Perle; and Bill Kristol, the founder of the neoconservative think tank Project for the New American Century (PNAC), which initiated an open letter to Jesuit trained President Bill Clinton calling for the removal of Saddam Hussein already in 1998.
Neocons weren’t all Jewish, though, and among the 25 signatories to the PNAC’s Statement of Principles were these non-Jewish men, for example:
– Jeb Bush, Governor of Florida (1999-2007), brother of George W. Bush. He’s a devout Roman Catholic and 4th degree Knight of Columbus.
– Dick Cheney, Vice President of the United States (2001-2009). Cheney was probably the most powerful government official in the Bush admistration, or the de facto president. In the 1980s and 1990s he was a director of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), the New York City based globalist think tank that has enormous influence on the US government.
— Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense (2001-2006). Rumsfeld attended Georgetown University, the formidable Jesuit university in Washington D.C., which is also the Jesuit headquarters in America. While attending Princeton, he was a friend of future Secretary of Defense under Reagan and Knight of Malta, Frank Carlucci. Carlucci and Rumsfeld were also associates during their political careers, and Carlucci, too, was affiliated with the PNAC.
– Frank Gaffney, a national security advisor in the Reagan administration. Gaffney was Jesuit trained at Georgetown University and is a member of the conservative counterpart of the CFR, the Council for National Policy (CNP). (Among CNP members are also Trump’s key advisors Kellyanne Conway and Jesuit trained Steve Bannon.)
– William J. Bennett, a conservative pundit. Bennett graduated form a Jesuit high school and served in the Reagan and George H.W. Bush administrations.
It’s also worth noting that Elliot Abrams has been affiliated with the Georgetown University and taught foreign policy at its Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service, and that Douglas J. Feith has a JD from Georgetown University and, like Abrams, was later employed by the Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service, where he taught a course on the Bush administration’s anti-terrorism policy.
My take is that the neocons weren’t behind the staged 9/11 attacks or the ”war on terror”. They played a major part temporarily, but in the grand scheme of things, they’re not that significant a group. While times change, the Jesuit Papacy stays, movements like neoconservatism come and go.
The Jesuits, CIA, and CFR deflecting the blame by pointing at Israel
This news snippet about a 2005 congress mock impeachment inquiry over the Iraq war is telling:
The session took an awkward turn when witness Ray McGovern, a former intelligence analyst, declared that the United States went to war in Iraq for oil, Israel and military bases craved by administration “neocons” so “the United States and Israel could dominate that part of the world.” He said that Israel should not be considered an ally and that Bush was doing the bidding of Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon.
“Israel is not allowed to be brought up in polite conversation,” McGovern said. “The last time I did this, the previous director of Central Intelligence called me anti-Semitic.”
Rep. James P. Moran Jr. (D-Va.), who prompted the question by wondering whether the true war motive was Iraq’s threat to Israel, thanked McGovern for his “candid answer.”
Ex-CIA Ray McGovern said the same on MSNBC The Situation withTucker Carlson in May 2006:
I‘ve been using the acronym O.I.L. for many—for two years now: O for oil; I for Israel; and L for logistics, logistics being the permanent—now we say “enduring”—military bases that the U.S. wants to keep in Iraq.
And, as it happens, McGovern is Jesuit trained. He has a MS from Fordham University, the Jesuit university in New York City. And so is James P. Moran Jr., who has a BA from the Jesuit College of the Holy Cross. Just a coincidence? McGovern also used to be a regular guest of Alex Jones, who’s been outed as a CIA asset and gatekeeper for the Vatican years ago.
Another Jesuit trained ex-CIA, who’s been pointing fingers at Israel, is Michael Scheuer. He attended Jesuit Canisius College in Buffalo and used to be an adjunct professor at the Georgetown University’s Center for Peace and Security Studies.
(The CIA itself has even been called “Catholics in Action”, because it’s been largely dominated by Roman Catholics, many of them devout mass-goers. The founder himself, William J. Donovan, was a devout Roman Catholic and was awarded the highest possible honor by the Pope, Knight of St. Sylvester. And at least these notable CIA directors have been Knights of Malta: John McCone (1961-1965), William Colby (1973-1976), and William J. Casey (1981-1987). In recent years, most CIA directors have been Jesuit trained, such as George Tenet (1997-2004), Leon Panetta (2009-2011), David Petraues (2011-2012), and John Brennan (2013-2017).)
Scheuer used to be a regular guest on CBS News and Fox News and has focused a lot on criticizing Israel and AIPAC, saying things like “we’re fighting wars for Israel” on TV. In his 2004 book Imperial Hubris, as an anonymous author, he said that one step in stopping the bogus “war on terror”, which was supposedly being fought against al-Qaeda and other jihadists, would be to “end all U.S. aid to Israel” and the “elimination of the Jewish state, and in its stead the creation of an Islamic Palestinian state”.
Scheuer also praised the New York Times Best Seller book The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy (2007), which sparked controversy and describes the lobby as a “loose coalition of individuals and organizations who actively work to steer U.S. foreign policy in a pro-Israel direction” and “focuses primarily on the lobby’s influence on U.S. foreign policy and its negative effect on American interests”.
John Mearsheimer, co-author of the book with Stephen Walt, happens to be a CFR member, as was another prominent endorser of the book, Jesuit trained Zbigniew Brzezinski. Brzezinski co-founded the globalist think tank Trilateral Commission with Japanese Jesuit coadjutor Tadashi Yamamoto, was a scholar for the Center for Strategic and International Studies, and worked closely with PNAC associate Zalmay Khalilzad on Operation Cyclone to support the mujahideen jihadists, who resisted the Soviet Union’s invasion of Afghanistan. Brzezinski and his protege Khalilzad were instrumental in building up Islamic fundamentalism in Afghanistan, to be used as a tool of US geopolitics in the Middle East.
An in-depth look into Khalilzad’s dealings in the Middle East here.
Iraq War benefited Iran more than Israel?
Excellent scholarly researcher Francisco Gil-White, who got fired from the University of Pennsylvania for exposing the PLO, and basically being pro-Israel, while his superior, CFR member Ian Lustick was anti-Israel, writes:
Could a Shia-dominated Islamist Iraq under Iran’s influence be what the US ruling elite wants?
Consider something else that Newsweek says:
“Iranian interference continues to haunt future scenarios for an independent, stable Iraq. [US ambassador to Iraq Zalmay] Khalilzad, echoing other US officials, said he is hoping for a ‘significant withdrawal’ of US troops from Iraq next year. But the Bush administration worries that a fractured Iraq under weak leadership will be Tehran’s playground.”
It appears that Iraq is indeed expected to become “Tehran’s playground.” So the actual effect of the US invasion of Iraq will be to turn it into an Islamist puppet state of Iran.
But the text above bears scrutiny. If Khalilzad is “echoing other US officials” when he says he would like a major troop withdrawal by next year, then which “Bush administration” is it that “worries that a fractured Iraq…will be Tehran’s playground”? Isn’t the Bush administration composed of “US officials”? And isn’t Khalilzad, the US Ambassador to Iraq, supposed to be mouthing the US’s official policy towards Iraq? And if the growth of Iranian power is not what the US ruling elite wants, then why are Khalilzad and other US officials calling for withdrawing the troops, a policy that will abandon Iraq to Iran?
The US ruling elite will pull the troops out of Iraq in order to give Iraq to Iran, but will complain publicly about the outcome, giving the appearance of withdrawing the troops under pressure from the US public.
Consistent with this view, consider what the Toronto Star wrote on 24 November 2005, in an article titled “White House sets stage for pullback of troops”:
“Zalmay Khalilzad, the U.S. ambassador to Iraq, also told CNN this week he believed it would be possible to begin a withdrawal of American forces next year. The change in tone appears to be an acknowledgement of the increasing unpopularity of the war, with one national poll this week indicating 65 per cent of Americans would like to see the troops home by the end of 2006.”
The word “also” is appended to Khalilzad’s opinion because he was echoing Pentagon officials and US Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice, whose identical views were reported in the same article. But perhaps you will notice the contradiction in what the Daily News reported Khalilzad as saying only four days later:
“Bush’s ambassador to Iraq warned yesterday that pulling out of the country early would be disastrous. ‘Terrorists could take over part of this country and expand from here,’ Zalmay Khalilzad told Newsweek. ‘And given the resources of Iraq, given the technical expertise of its people, it will make Afghanistan look like child’s play.’”
Since a withdrawal needs to be planned, and since Zalmay Khalilzad’s preferred date for a major withdrawal — “next year” — is already upon us (this is November), Khalilzad is in fact calling for an immediate troop withdrawal even as he explains that “pulling out…early would be disastrous.” An absurdity? Not under my hypothesis: the US ruling elite wants the “disastrous” result, but knows that the American public will deplore it, so US officials must appear to deplore it also, and to be pulling out of Iraq reluctantly, under pressure from the American public. This is precisely why US government statements about impending withdrawal did not come before the polls began to show a strong US majority for it, as we see above.
Roman Catholic and Jesuit trained government officials and military officers leading the “war on terror”
Here’s a list of some of the Roman Catholic and/or Jesuit trained key leaders of the “war on terror”:
Secretary of Defense:
– Donald Rumsfeld (2001-2006). Attended Georgetown University. Friend and associate of Knight of Malta Frank Carlucci, Secretary of Defense under Reagan. – Robert Gates (2006-2011). PhD and and honorary degree from Georgetown University. – Leon Panetta (2011-2013). BA and JD from Jesuit Santa Clara University.
Deputy National Security Advisor for Iraq and Afghanistan:
– Meghan L. O’Sullivan (2004-2007). Roman Catholic. Graduated from Georgetown University. Member of the board of directors of the CFR and North American Chairman of the Trilateral Commission. – Douglas Lute (2007-2010). Roman Catholic. His wife Jane Holl Lute, Deputy Secretary of Homeland Security (2009-2013), has a JD from Georgetown University.
– John Abizaid (2003-2007). Roman Catholic. – William J. Fallon (2007-2008). Roman Catholic. Graduated from a Catholic university. – Martin Dempsey (2008). See above. – David Petraeus (2008-2010). Completed a military fellowship at the Georgetown University’s Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service. – John R. Allen (2010). Graduated with a MA from Georgetown University. – Jim Mattis (2010-2013). A devout Roman Catholic. Keynote speaker at the 2019 Alfred E. Smith Memorial Foundation Dinner.
Commander of Multi-National Force – Iraq:
– Ricardo Sanchez (2003-2004). Roman Catholic. – George W. Casey Jr. (2004-2007). Graduated from Jesuit Boston College High School and from Georgetown University with a BS. – David Petraeus (2007-2008). See above. – Raymond T. Odierno (2008-2010). Roman Catholic.
Commander of Multi-National Corps — Iraq:
– Peter W. Chiarelli. Roman Catholic. Graduated from Jesuit Seattle University with a BS and from Catholic Salve Regina University with a MA. – Raymond T. Odierno. See above.
Vatican still wants Jerusalem
Could the underlying reason for the US wars in the Middle East be related to the Vatican’s quest for Jerusalem? It would make a lot of sense, remembering how “crypto-Catholic” George W. Bush talked about these wars being a “crusade”, and noting how they were led mostly by Roman Catholics and Jesuit agents.
Here’s some history of the Vatican’s policy on the status of Jerusalem:
Already during the 19th century, the Holy See was concerned about the control over the holy places in Palestine, especially in Jerusalem. In 1887, Pope Leo XIII issued a motu proprio titled Domini et Salvatoris, in which he called for the establishment of a Catholic fund to maintain the holy places in Jerusalem and the Holy Land.
The early Zionists sought to assure the Vatican of the sanctity of Christian holy places, but the Vatican was not satisfied with these assurances. The Vatican was not invited to attend the 1920 San Remo conference, which decided the fate of Palestine, and had to rely on France and Italy to represent its interests. The San Remo conference set aside a Protectorate of the Holy See. According to Minerbi, the Vatican’s objectives were ultimately undermined by the Zionist Organization’s support for a British Mandate.
But the Vatican did not give up on its objective of direct Catholic control of the Holy Land and the holy places. The Vatican’s idea for an international commission to resolve claims on the holy places had been incorporated in article 95 of the Treaty of Sèvres, and was repeated as articles 13 and 14 of the Mandate. Britain assumed responsibility for the holy places under article 13 of the Mandate. However, Britain never created the International Commission on Holy Places to resolve the other claims in accordance with article 14 of the Mandate.
The Vatican’s official position on the status of Jerusalem was in favour of an internationalization of Jerusalem, in order to keep the holy places away from either Israeli or Arab sovereignty.
It can’t be that the Vatican is only interested in “access to their Holy Sites” in Jerusalem. They already have that as well as legal jurisdiction under Israeli law for their institutions and assets in Jerusalem. Also, when these “Holy Sites” were under the jurisdiction of the Jordanians from l948-l967, no Pope demanded the “internationalization of Jerusalem”.
It is something else, which the Vatican wants. The Roman Catholic Church, need to have certain versions of events be played out for them to stand in front of mankind and proclaim: “our Messiah has returned.” Of course, to the Jews, this Messiah will be as false as the first one was supposed to be. Don’t matter. This is the goal of the Vatican and this is what all Israelis need to worry about.
[…]
First, you have to realize that for centuries The Vatican has attempted to obtain control of Jerusalem, which started with the Crusades.For them to convince the world that the Messiah they put on the world’s stage is going to be accepted as genuine, they need to perform this play in the Old City.The story of this production is that this “Messiah” will merge the three monotheistic religions, usher in peace and harmony in the world, and solve the Middle East conflict. The location for this “production” will be in none other than the Old City of Jerusalem.
This so-called “Messiah” that will be proclaimed, will be a false one and it will insist that by having a “world government” (i.e., the United Nations) the world peace and harmony will be ushered in. This will be a lie, and a fraud, but never mind. In our world, reality isn’t important. Public perceptions are. The end result is the stripping of Israel’s sovereignty as an independent nation giving way to a “regional bloc of nations” in the Middle East.
Labor Zionist leader and longtime influencer in Israeli politics, Shimon Peres (1923-2016), actually secretly promised to hand over Jerusalem to the Vatican amidst the Oslo Accords negotiations. He met with the Popes and visited the Vatican often, and it’s quite apparent that he was a Vatican agent. On his now defunct website, investigative journalist Barry Chamish (1952-2016) looked back to how he broke the story:
In 1979, Yitzhak Rabin published his autobiography, within was a one-line offbeat quote. He said that unlike all Jewish children growing up in Poland, Shimon Peres spent his early education at a Jesuit school. It was an odd fact and I took a mental note of it without understanding its significance…
Until I broke my first attention-getting story as a political journalist:
In March 1994, the newspaper Chadashot revealed a most remarkable secret of the Middle East “peace” process. A friend of Shimon Peres, the French intellectual Marek Halter… claimed in an interview that in May 1993, he delivered a letter from Peres to the pope. Within, Peres promised to internationalize Jerusalem, granting the UN political control of the Old City of Jerusalem, and the Vatican hegemony of the holy sites within. The UN would give the PLO a capital within its new territory and East Jerusalem would become a kind of free trade zone of world diplomacy.
Halter’s claim was backed by the Italian newspaper La Stampawhich added that Arafat was apprised of the agreement and it was included in the secret clauses of the Declaration Of Principles signed in Washington in September 1993.
In March 1995, the Israeli radio station Arutz Sheva was leaked a cable from the Israeli Embassy in Rome to Peres’s Foreign Ministry in Jerusalem confirming the handover of Jerusalem to the Vatican. This cable was printed on the front page of the radical leftwing Israeli newspaper, Ha’aretz two days later. A scandal erupted and numerous rabbis who had invited Peres for Passover services cancelled their invitations in protest of his treachery. Peres reacted by claiming that the cable was real but that someone had whited out the word, “not;” the cable really said that Israel would “not” hand Jerusalem over to the holy pontiff.
Illustrating the sorry political state of Israel’s rabbis, they accepted this cockamamie excuse and re-invited Peres to their tables. However, in the widely distributed minutes of a meeting with Clinton in 1997, Peres reiterated his diplomacy, ending with the words, “as I had previously promised the Holy See.”
Along the way, Peres also publicly expressed his willingness to give the Vatican what he promised;
President Shimon Peres is willing to hand over Israeli sovereignty of key Christian holy sites to the Vatican, a proposition that is reportedly opposed by Interior Minister Eli Yishai and that has ruffled feathers among other senior government officials, Army Radio reported on Monday. Beit Hanassi could not be reached for comment on Monday, as it does not issue statements to the press while the president is abroad. According to the radio report, the president is exerting pressure on the government to give up sovereignty over six sites, including the Church of the Annunciation in Nazareth, the Coenaculum on Mount Zion, Gethsemane on the Mount of Olives in Jerusalem, and the Church of the Multiplication on the Kinneret. — Jerusalem Post, May 4, 2009
Around the same time the Vatican’s representatives made many aggressive statements directed at Israel:
Pope Benedict’s point man for justice and peace issues on Wednesday issued the Vatican’s toughest criticism of Israel since the latest Mideast crisis began, calling Gaza a “big concentration camp.”
Cardinal Renato Martino, president of the Vatican’s Council for Justice and Peace, made his comments in an interview in the Italian online newspaper Il Sussidiario.net. — Reuters, January 7, 2009
Israel cannot use the Biblical concept of a promised land or a chosen people to justify new “settlements” in Jerusalem or territorial claims, a Vatican synod on the Middle East said on Saturday.
Asked about the passage at a news conference, Greek-Melchite Archbishop Cyrille Salim Bustros, said:
“We Christians cannot speak about the promised land for the Jewish people. There is no longer a chosen people. All men and women of all countries have become the chosen people.
“The concept of the promised land cannot be used as a base for the justification of the return of Jews to Israel and the displacement of Palestinians,” he added. “The justification of Israel’s occupation of the land of Palestine cannot be based on sacred scriptures.”
The synod’s concluding message repeated a Vatican call for Jerusalem to have a special status “which respects its particular character” as a city sacred to the three great monotheistic religions — Judaism, Christianity and Islam. — ynetnews, October 23, 2010
“Peace negotiations in the Middle East must tackle the issue of the status of the holy sites of Jerusalem”, Cardinal Jean-Louis Tauran, head of the Vatican’s Council for Interreligious Dialogue, declared several days ago in Rome.
The Vatican’s former foreign minister asked to place some Israeli holy places under Vatican authority, alluding to the Cenacle on Mount Zion and the garden of Gethsemane at the foot of the Mount of Olives in Jerusalem.
The first site also houses what is referred to as King David’s tomb.
“There will not be peace if the question of the holy sites is not adequately resolved”, Tauran said. “The part of Jerusalem within the walls – with the holy sites of the three religions – is humanity’s heritage. The sacred and unique character of the area must be safeguarded and it can only be done with a special, internationally-guaranteed statute”.
The Israeli government and the Vatican are deadlocked in discussions over the status of the religious sites. Vatican officials are now reiterating their demand for control over the religious sites in the ancient and holy city founded by King David as the capital of ancient Israel and now the capital of the reestablished Jewish state.
Danny Ayalon, Israel’s deputy foreign minister, declared that Israel might consider giving the Vatican “a greater role” in operating the sites. In the last weeks, the Roman Catholic Church’s authorities increased their political initiatives for Catholic control over some sites in Jerusalem.
The Vatican’s former arcibishop in Jerusalem, Michel Sabbah, just promoted an appeal to the European Union and United States to “stop the Hebraization of Jerusalem”. — Giulio Meotti, December 15, 2011
Since Jorge Maria Bergoglio became the new Pope, and the first Jesuit pope, in 2013, things have cooled a bit, though, at least seemingly. In June 2014, there was an ecumenical meeting in the Vatican, where Pope Francis, Israeli president Shimon Peres, Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas, and Greek Orthodox Patriarch Bartholomew prayed together “for peace in the Middle East”. A Jewish rabbi and a Muslim imam were also present.
And Peres called for the establishment of “United Religions”:
“In the past, the majority of wars were motivated by the idea of nationhood. Today, instead, wars are sparked above all with the excuse of religion,” Peres said.
“Now, given the fact that the United Nations has had its day, what is needed is an Organisation of United Religions, a U.N. of religions. It would be the best way to combat these terrorists who kill in the name of faith because the majority of people are not like them …,” he said.
So, think of this: Why are there all of these powerful Catholic chivalric orders? Such as the Sovereign Military Hospitaller Order of Saint John of Jerusalem, of Rhodes and of Malta aka Knights of Malta, the Equestrian Order of the Holy Sepulchre of Jerusalem aka Knights of the Holy Sepulchre, the Order of Brothers of the German House of Saint Mary in Jerusalem aka Teutonic order, and the Sacred Military Constantinian Order of Saint George. The clue is in their names; many of them they include “Jerusalem”.
The Trilateral Commission, though less known than the notorious Bilderberg Group, is one of the most prominent and important globalist think tanks. These secretive elite think tanks are working to bring about a “new world order”, which entails undermining the sovereignty of nation states and implementing global government. Global government has of course, to a large extent, already been achieved through the United Nations, especially with the global warming/climate change scam, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) being its massive climate propaganda machine.
Another key tool for furthering the globalist agenda is the mass immigration of people from the third world to Europe and the West, which is an effective way to weaken nation states, because they are, in the end, held together by the sense of national unity. That’s why Peter Sutherland (1946-2018), a leading member of both the Trilateral Commission and the Bilderberg Group, and UN Special Representative for International Migration, once said that the EU should undermine national homogeneity of its member states. The UN has also had a plan for “replacement migration”, which basically means mass scale population transfers aka government enabled and sanctioned mass immigration to European and Western countries (and Japan), the pretext being the aging of the population in them. And still leftists say the Great Replacement is a “far right, white supremacist conspiracy theory”. Sutherland also served as a financial adviser to the Vatican, and he was Jesuit trained.
Jesuits and the founding of the Trilateral Commission
But who founded the Trilateral Commission in 1973? It was none other than David Rockefeller (1915-2017), whose right-hand man in organizing the group was Zbigniew Brzezinski (1928-2017). Brzezinski was Jesuit trained at Loyola High School in Montreal and later received an honorary degree from Fordham University, the Jesuit university in New York City, of which alumni include Donald Trump and Andrew Cuomo, the current Governor of New York.
As the Trilateral Commission was formed to serve as a liaison between the elites of Japan, North American nations, and Western European nations, there was also a Japanese founding member. The man was Tadashi Yamamoto (1936-2012). Yamamoto enrolled at Sophia University, the Jesuit university in Tokyo, in 1954 with the intention of becoming a Catholic priest. But his career plans changed and he transferred to St. Norbert College, a Catholic college in Wisconsin, in 1958. He studied in the USA from 1958 until 1962, receiving his MBA from Marquette University, a Jesuit university in Milwaukee. I guess we can say Yamamoto was a “Jesuit of the short robe”, like the leading coronavirus expert Anthony Fauci.
Brzezinski, CFR, and the Israel lobby
As an interesting side note, you may remember the controversy over the book The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy (2007), which describes the lobby as a “loose coalition of individuals and organizations who actively work to steer U.S. foreign policy in a pro-Israel direction” and “focuses primarily on the lobby’s influence on U.S. foreign policy and its negative effect on American interests”. John Mearsheimer, co-author of the book with Stephen Walt, happens to be a member of the New York based American globalist think tank Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). And so was of course also David Rockefeller, who served as its chairman (1970-1985), and his associate and middleman Brzezinski.
Brzezinski praised the book of his fellow CFR member Mearsheimer, having always also been a prominent critic of Israel’s policies. Not that the influence of the Israel lobby isn’t an issue that should be addressed, but can you see how all this works? A Jesuit trained CFR member and globalist endorsing a book about the Israeli influence by another CFR member, while we should put the CFR itself under great scrutiny, and of course also talk about the vast Jesuit Vatican influence in America. Thus, what we have here with the book and the controversy surrounding it, is a good example of a “limited hangout” on a sociopolitical level.
The book was publicly endorsed also by ex-CIA Michael Scheuer, who used to be a regular guest on CBS News and Fox News and has focused a lot on criticizing Israel and AIPAC, sometimes saying things like “we’re fighting wars for Israel” on TV. In his 2004 book Imperial Hubris, as an anonymous author, he said that one step in stopping the bogus “war on terror”, which was supposedly being fought against al-Qaeda and other jihadists, would be to “end all U.S. aid to Israel” and the “elimination of the Jewish state, and in its stead the creation of an Islamic Palestinian state”.
The first thing we should ask ourselves is, is there really an ongoing worldwide pandemic that we should be overly worried about? It doesn’t look like there is. We have a “dem-panic”, yes, but the figures we’ve been shown, if they’re even accurate, don’t indicate anything extraordinary when compared to the effects of the common seasonal flu.
It is important to have a perspective on the apparent deaths provably due to COVID-19. Here facts become very imprecise.
As of March 3, 2020 according to WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom, worldwide there were a total of 90,893 cases of COVID-19, with 3,110 resulting in death. He then called this a 3.4% mortality rate, a figure highly disputed by other health experts. Tedros stated, “Globally, about 3.4% of reported COVID-19 cases have died. By comparison, seasonal flu generally kills far fewer than 1% of those infected.”
The problem is that no one can say precisely what the true death rate is. That’s because globally we have not tested all who might have mild cases of the virus and the accuracy of those tests are anything but 100% certain. But a statement about a death rate more than three times that of seasonal flu is a real panic-maker if true.
The reality is very likely a far lower true mortality according to epidemic experts. “We do not report all the cases,” says Professor John Edmunds of the Centre for the Mathematical Modelling of Infectious Diseases at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine. “In fact, we only usually report a small proportion of them. If there are many more cases in reality, then the case fatality ratio will be lower.” Edmunds went on to say, “What you can safely say […] is that if you divide the number of reported deaths by the number of reported cases [to get the case fatality ratio], you will almost certainly get the wrong answer.” The WHO under Tedros seems to be erring on the side of spreading panic.
The WHO and the USA CDC some years ago changed the definition of deaths from seasonal flu to “deaths of flu or pneumonia.” The CDC calculates only an approximate flu death count by totaling death certificates processed that list “pneumonia or influenza” as the underlying or contributing cause of death. The CDC estimates 45 Million Flu Cases, and 61,000 what they deftly call “Flu-Associated” Deaths in 2017-2018 US Flu Season. How many were elderly with pneumonia or other lung diseases is unclear. Naturally the numbers help spread fear and sell seasonal flu vaccines whose positive effect is anything but proven. Worldwide, the CDC estimated in a study in 2017 that, “between 291,000 and 646,000 people worldwide die from seasonal influenza-related respiratory illnesses each year.”
In other words, if we go by the numbers we’ve been given, the massive hype about a “worldwide pandemic” is unfounded, because the number of deaths is nothing compared to what’s caused annually by the seasonal flu, and the mortality rate has most likely also been greatly exaggerated. Or, there is no out-of-the-ordinary pandemic, and the virus isn’t as deadly as the news would have us believe.
So, what’s all this hype for? Is the whole thing one giant psyop to scare people into accepting, or even demanding, tighter population control?
By now, those following the novel coronavirus epidemic are familiar with Event 201, the pandemic simulation staged by Johns Hopkins University in conjunction with the World Economic Forum, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Johnson & Johnson, and other ruling-class heavy hitters in October. The media establishment has already picked the story clean, set up and eviscerated a straw man (“No, Bill Gates didn’t cause the coronavirus epidemic, silly conspiracy theorists!”), and convinced the group itself to issue a statement denying their exercise was meant to predict the behavior of the actual virus to follow.
But few are aware that the epidemic playing out in China and two dozen other countries, including the US, is unfolding in line with a decade-old simulation titled “Lock Step” devised by the Rockefeller Foundation in conjunction with the Global Business Network. The scenario, one of four included in a publication called “Scenarios for the Future of Technology and International Development” in 2010, describes a coronavirus-like pandemic that becomes the trigger for the imposition of police-state controls on movement, economy, and other areas of society.
Here’s an excerpt from the Rockefeller Foundation document from 2010, outlining the “lock step” scenario involving a viral disease pandemic:
In 2012, the pandemic that the world had been anticipating for years finally hit. Unlike 2009’s H1N1, this new influenza strain—originating from wild geese—was extremely virulent and deadly. Even the most pandemic-prepared nations were quickly overwhelmed when the virus streaked around the world, infecting nearly 20 percent of the global population and killing 8 million in just seven months, the majority of them healthy young adults. The pandemic also had a deadly effect on economies: international mobility of both people and goods screeched to a halt, debilitating industries like tourism and breaking global supply chains. Even locally, normally bustling shops and office buildings sat empty for months, devoid of both employees and customers.
…
But even in developed countries, containment was a challenge. The United States’s initial policy of “strongly discouraging” citizens from flying proved deadly in its leniency, accelerating the spread of the virus not just within the U.S. but across borders. However, a few countries did fare better—China in particular. The Chinese government’s quick imposition and enforcement of mandatory quarantine for all citizens, as well as its instant and near-hermetic sealing off of all borders, saved millions of lives, stopping the spread of the virus far earlier than in other countries and enabling a swifter post- pandemic recovery.
China’s government was not the only one that took extreme measures to protect its citizens from risk and exposure. During the pandemic, national leaders around the world flexed their authority and imposed airtight rules and restrictions, from the mandatory wearing of face masks to body-temperature checks at the entries to communal spaces like train stations and supermarkets. Even after the pandemic faded, this more authoritarian control and oversight of citizens and their activities stuck and even intensified. In order to protect themselves from the spread of increasingly global problems—from pandemics and transnational terrorism to environmental crises and rising poverty—leaders around the world took a firmer grip on power.
The current situation is playing out very much like this scenario, the main difference being that there are no millions of deaths. Apparently the elite don’t even need a real pandemic, they can just use the media to create an illusion there is one, and people will consequently panic and accept totalitarian, police state type of measures.
See how China, which already is a totalitarian state, is set as an example of how things should be done in the case of a terrible pandemic. I.e., they’re kind of implying that European and Western countries should be more like China. Yes, they’re supposedly just speculating on a possible scenario, but if you look more into elite think tanks, like the Rockefeller Foundation or the globalist think tank Trilateral Commission, which was founded by David Rockefeller, you’ll see that their “scenarios” are actually plans for the future. Reports like these are meant to be self-fulfilling prophesies, not mere speculation, and they often seem to get eventually realized as well.
And isn’t it at least a remarkable coincidence that the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security in partnership with the World Economic Forum and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation hosted Event 201, a high-level pandemic exercise on October 18, 2019, two months before the supposed outbreak of the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) in China, with the scenario being “an outbreak of a novel zoonotic coronavirus transmitted from bats to pigs to people that eventually becomes efficiently transmissible from person to person, leading to a severe pandemic”.
Note how COVID-19 is also said to have a zoonotic origin like the fictional coronavirus. This is only speculation, but could it be that COVID-19 is basically fictional, too, and that the deaths supposedly caused by it are actually due to seasonal influenza viruses? Or, if we assume that the elite had prior knowledge of the coronavirus pandemic, of which there’s indication (not only through “lock step” or Event 201, but also Clade X, another pandemic drill by the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, in May 2018), there are only two possible explanations: either the new coronavirus was engineered and deliberately disseminated, or it’s all just a hoax, i.e., there is no novel coronavirus causing a pandemic, and the reported deaths, of mostly elderly people, are related to the common flu.
Is the coronavirus pandemic scare a psyop, aka a psychological operation, and a preplanned worldwide experiment on how the population will react to this kind of scenario and how easy it’s to manipulate them into accepting totalitarian measures or emergency laws? Speaking of that, as I’m writing this, the Finnish government has just officially declared a state of emergency with severe restrictions on crowd gatherings, for example. All that while we, here in Finland, reportedly have only 278 confirmed cases and no deaths. I mean, the reaction is ridiculously over the top, isn’t it?
All in all, this whole thing seems like a classic elite implemented problem-reaction-solution scenario: problem – a pandemic threatening the lives of millions; reaction – fear and panic; solution – totalitarian population control measures to create a sense of security in people. More and more control over the masses is what the ruling elite have always sought after, it’s their main objective, and with these current worldwide events related to the pandemic scare, they’re getting exactly that.
But this could also be seen as social engineering and preparation of the general population for other similar future scenarios. I.e., maybe this is a “beta test”, and the elite will fabricate or create an even more catastrophic scenario in the future, and when they go ahead with it, people will readily give up all their liberties for a sense of security.
You can call me a “conspiracy nut” or whatever, but to me, there are too many coincidences here, and it just doesn’t make sense that the whole world is on halt because of a few thousand deaths, when there are hundreds of thousands seasonal flu related deaths every year. But make of this what you will.
One of the biggest proponents of this mass immigration of muslims and third world people to Europe is Jesuit trained Roman Catholic Peter Sutherland. In business he’s worked for Goldman Sachs International and the Vatican as a financial adviser. Otherwise he’s served on the steering committee of the Bilderberg Group, as a Chairman of the Trilateral Commission and the UN Special Representative for Migration.
The EU should “do its best to undermine” the “homogeneity” of its member states, the UN’s special representative for migration has said.
Peter Sutherland told peers the future prosperity of many EU states depended on them becoming multicultural.
What he’s proposing there is in accordance with the UN agenda for replacement migration, which in reality is a veiled act of war against white people, and if fully implemented, will lead to the slow eradication of the white race by replacement, displacement and miscegenation, i.e., White Genocide. This forced multiculturalism will of course also be used as a pretext and platform for creating a federal Europe, or the “United States of Europe”.
Dominus ac Redemptor 1773 
You must be logged in to post a comment.